Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority

Transcription

Planning and Regulation Guidelines
August 28, 2009
Revision
0
Date
August 28, 2009
Comments
Approved by Board of Directors
NVCA Planning and Regulation Guidelines
Table of Contents
1.0
INTRODUCTION
Page 5
1.1
The role of the Planning Services program
1.2
What is the purpose of these guidelines and who is the primary audience?
1.3
What approach was used in the development of these guidelines?
1.4
When will these guidelines come into effect?
2.0
LEGISLATION AND PROVINCIAL PLANS AND POLICY DIRECTION Page 8
2.1
Conservation Authority Act
2.2
Planning Act
2.3
Other related legislation
2.3.1 The Federal Fisheries Act
2.4
Provincial policies, plans and guidelines
2.4.1 Provincial Policy Statement 2005
2.4.1.1
Technical Guidelines Supporting the PPS
2.4.1.1.1 Natural Heritage Reference Manual
2.4.1.1.2 Understanding Natural Hazards; and detailed Technical
Guidelines for Great Lakes and Rivers Flood and
Erosion Hazards -MNR
2.4.2 Oak Ridges Moraine Plan
2.4.2.1
Oak Ridges Moraine Technical Guidelines
2.4.3 Niagara Escarpment Plan
2.4.4 Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe
2.4.5 The Greenbelt Plan
2.4.6 Provincial Delegation of Authority and Memorandum of Understanding
(MOU)
3.0
NVCA’S STRATEGIC DIRECTIONS, POLICIES AND GUIDELINES
Page 21
3.1
Watershed Plan (1996) and Strategic Review (December 2006)
3.2
Subwatershed Plans (Black Ash, Willow and Innisfil Creeks)
3.3
NVCA’s Three-year Business Plan and Annual Budget
3.4
Conservation Land Protection and Acquisition Policy - May 2002
3.5
Pond Policy -May 2005
3.6
Engineering’s Technical Development Review Guidelines (Stormwater)
4.0
GUIDELINES TO SUPPORT THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE
AUTHORITY’S SECTION 28 REGULATION
4.1
Procedures for the Implementation of Ontario Regulation 172/06
4.2
Background to NVCA’s Generic Regulation 172/06
4.3
River or Stream Valleys
4.4
Great Lakes Shorelines
4.5
Hazardous Lands
4.6
Watercourses
4.7
Wetlands and Adjacent Lands
4.8
Additional NVCA Natural Hazards Guidelines
Page 25
2
5.0
GUIDELINES FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PLAN INPUT AND
REVIEW PROGRAM
Page 80
5.1
Background to the Plan Input and Review Program
5.2
General Plan Input and Review Implementation Guidelines
5.3
Natural Heritage
5.4
Water Quality and Quantity
5.5
Natural Hazards
6.0
GLOSSARY
Page 86
7.0
REFERENCES AND WEB LINKS
Page 94
List of Figures
Figure 1 Cross section through a typical regulated area
Figure 2 Regulated river or stream valley containing non-hazardous valley lands
Figure 3 Apparent river or stream valley where the valley slopes are stable
Figure 4 Apparent river or stream valley associated with unstable slopes and stable toe
Figure 5 Apparent river or stream valley with unstable slopes and active toe erosion
Figure 6 Not apparent river or stream valley (meander belt)
Figure 7 Regulated area of floodplain for a not apparent valley
Figure 8 One-zone concept flooding hazard limit
Figure 9 Two-zone concept flooding hazard Limit
Figure 10 Lake flooding
Figure 11 Lake erosion
Figure 12 Lake erosion down cutting, see technical guidelines - Great Lakes - St.
Lawrence River (MNR, 1996b)
Figure 13 Dynamic beach
Figure 14 Three ways through which the Conservation Authorities Act and NVCA’s
regulation address wetlands and other areas.
3
Appendices
Appendix 1
Appendix 2
Appendix 3
Appendix 4
Appendix 5
Appendix 6
Appendix 7
Appendix 8
Provincial Delegation of Authority and Memorandum of
Understanding
Municipal Plan Input and Review Agreements
a)
Simcoe County MOU
b)
Streamlining of Consent Applications
Oak Ridges Moraine Permit Implementation Guidelines
Conservation Land Protection and Acquisition Policy
Pond Policy
Environmental Impact Study
Two-Zone and Special Policy Areas Floodplain Management Approaches
Interpretation of Clause 2(1)(d) and Clause 2(1)(e) (Great Lakes
Shoreline) in Conservation Authorities Regulations
4
1.0
INTRODUCTION
1.1
The role of the Planning Services Program
The mission of the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority is “Working together to value,
protect, enhance, and restore our watershed resources, for a healthy sustainable future.”
There are numerous tools in the form of legislation, provincial plans, policies, and guidelines that
assist the Authority in achieving this goal. The Conservation Authorities Act and Planning Act
are the most important tools used by the Planning Services program to further the goal. These
Acts and accompanying regulations, policies and guidelines, provide the basis and authority for
this document.
The achievement of the Authority’s goal, objectives and targets is a challenge as development
pressure within the watershed is expected to increase along with competition for the land and
resources such as water. Other factors such as climate change and the potential for more frequent
extreme weather events (both storms and droughts) add to the challenges and uncertainty. The
NVCA will assist its municipal partners in managing growth and the competing resource uses, so
as to ensure the long-term health and sustainability of the watershed.
Planning Services’ programs play a significant role in helping to ensure the long-term health and
sustainability of the watershed. They contribute to the Authority’s goal, objectives, targets and
legislative requirements through the regulation program and by providing watershed and
ecosystem based planning advice to our municipal partners and the public. This information
helps guide municipalities, landowners and watershed stakeholders in the land use planning and
permitting processes.
The planning program provides environmental planning expertise to guide municipal and other
land-use planning decision on a watershed basis, consistent with current applicable federal and
provincial legislation and policies, authority policy and municipal planning policy.
The Planning Services program has three major components:
1. Plan Input and Review (Planning, Environmental Assessment and Niagara
Escarpment Acts etc.)
2. Conservation Authority Regulation and Permitting (Conservation Authorities Act)
3. Strategic Planning (Watershed/subwatershed plans and policy/guideline
development)
These guidelines have been developed for the first two components to provide the technical
details and direction to help ensure a consistent approach in implementing the Planning and
Regulation programs. The strategic planning component follows the water management
guidelines provided by the Ministry of Natural Resources at the following link.
http://www.mnr.gov.on.ca/MNR_E002319.pdf
5
1.2
What is the purpose of these guidelines and who is the primary audience?
The guidelines will assist staff in meeting the Authority’s goal, objectives, targets and planning
and permitting obligations.
The primary audience is Authority staff. They will be particularly useful for new staff as it will
provide a summary of all relevant legislation, plans and policies. The guidelines will provide
staff with the Authority’s technical standards and requirements (e.g. vegetative setbacks required
for streams and wetlands) for both the Plan Input and Review and Permitting programs.
The guidelines will also be a valuable source of information for the Authority’s Board of
Directors, municipal staff, development industry and the public.
1.3
What approach was used in the development of these guidelines?
Planning Service’s two largest programs are the Plan Input/Review and Regulation & Permitting
programs. These guidelines provide direction for the implementation of the policies for each of
these programs as mandated by the Planning Act and the Conservation Authorities Act.
There often is a need for coordination between these two programs. For example, development
restrictions related to a Planning Act application adjacent to or within a natural hazard, should be
similar to restrictions related to a permit application for the same property. To assist in
promoting this coordination, the guidelines for both programs are located within this document
and the areas requiring coordination are highlighted.
To make the guidelines as clear and concise as possible, they summarize relevant legislation and
policy sections and reference the supporting documents rather than copy large amounts of
material into this document. In some cases the website where the supporting material is located
has been identified. The most important supporting documentation is placed in the appendix.
Those guidelines that apply to both the regulation and plan input/review programs (for example
natural hazards) will only be provided once under the regulation section. It will be noted that
they also apply to the implementation of the planning program.
To promote greater consistency between conservation authorities across the province and
provide the highest quality technical standards and advice in implementing the Section 28
Regulations, Conservation Ontario has developed detailed technical guidelines. This document is
titled Draft Guidelines to Support Conservation Authority Administration of the “Development,
Interference with Wetlands and Alteration to Shorelines and Watercourses Regulation” dated
April 21, 2008. It provides guidelines to assist conservation authorities in interpreting and
implementing the Conservation Authorities Act, Section 28 (1) Regulations. It is intended to
provide a framework around which local, Board-approved regulations implementation guidelines
can be created or adjusted to encourage consistency amongst all conservation authorities.
These NVCA guidelines use this Conservation Ontario document as the basis for Section 4
dealing with the Section 28 Regulation. However, there may be a few situations where the
NVCA’s guidelines differ somewhat from Conservation Ontario’s framework due to local
conditions and historic precedents.
6
Conservation Ontario’s Section 28 guidelines have been developed with input and review from
the local Authorities. This version, dated April 21, 2008, has been endorsed by Conservation
Ontario’s council for submission to the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) for approval and
use by authority staff. Once approved by MNR, the final Conservation Ontario document will be
circulated to all authorities and placed on their website.
The NVCA’s proposed Planning and Regulation Guidelines were first presented to the
Authority’s Planning Advisory Committee on May 9, 2008, and staff were directed to use the
document as an “interim guideline.” They were then circulated to municipal planning staff on
May 21st, 2008, for review and comments. The proposed guidelines have been posted on the
NVCA’s website inviting public input since May 2008. A workshop was held with municipal
partners to review the draft guidelines and obtain feedback in November 2008.The revised
guidelines were presented to the Authority’s Planning Advisory Committee on April 17, 2009.
Following their direction, the guidelines were circulated to member municipalities and posted on
our website for a further 30 day review period.
These guidelines include the results of the consultation process and once Conservation Ontario’s
guidelines have been approved by the province, they will be updated again as appropriate.
It is important to note that these Planning and Regulation Guidelines will be a dynamic and
“living document” that will evolve as new information and technical standards are developed by
the Authority, Conservation Ontario and the province. Updates will be posted on the NVCA
website and notices of revisions will be sent to our municipal partners.
1.4
When will these guidelines come into effect?
The guidelines came into effect on August 28th, 2009, following their approval by the NVCA
Board of Directors.
7
2.0
LEGISLATION AND PROVINCIAL PLANS AND POLICY DIRECTION
This section highlights the legislation, provincial plans, policies and guidelines that provide the
Conservation Authority with its mandate and direction in planning matters.
The Planning program plays a major role in implementing numerous pieces of legislation. In
some cases it coordinates input and comments from all NVCA program areas. For example, the
Planning program coordinates engineering and natural heritage comments for applications under
the Planning Act. In other cases, (authority regulation) the Planning program acts as the approval
agency.
A following chart lists the legislation, identifies where it applies, and outlines the Authority’s
role. The most significant pieces of legislation are dealt with in more detail below.
Legislation:
Conservation Authorities Act (entire watershed)
Planning Act (entire watershed)
Municipal Act (entire watershed)
Federal Fisheries Act (entire watershed)
Environmental Assessment Act (entire watershed)
Aggregate Resources Act (entire watershed)
Niagara Escarpment Planning & Development Act
(portions of Clearview, Mulmur, Grey Highlands and
Towns of The Blue Mountains and Mono)
Conservation Land Act (entire watershed)
Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Act (portions of
Adjala-Tosorontio, Towns of New Tecumseth and
Mono)
Greenbelt Act (small portion of the Town of Mono)
Places to Grow Act (2005) (Simcoe, Dufferin counties)
Ontario Water Resources Act (entire watershed)
Clean Water Act (entire watershed)
NVCA Role:
approval
commenting
commenting
commenting
commenting
commenting
commenting
approval
commenting
commenting
commenting
commenting
commenting/coordinating
To locate the most recent versions of the provincial legislation listed above and accompanying
regulations please consult the following website: http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca
2.1
Conservation Authorities Act
The Conservation Authorities Act (1946) established conservation authorities as local agencies,
in response to flooding and erosion problems and the management of natural resources. Their
geographic jurisdictions are watershed-based ecological systems.
The ability and powers for conservation authorities to become involved in natural resource and
water management comes from the following sections of the Act.
8
Section 20 (1) of the Act broadly defines the purpose of an Authority as follows:
"The objects of an Authority are to establish and undertake in the area over which it has
jurisdiction, a program designed to further the conservation, restoration, development
and management of natural resources other than gas, oil, coal and minerals."
More specifically the following subsections of Section 21(1) outlines the powers of Authorities
related to water management and planning as:
(a) “To study and investigate the watershed and to determine a program whereby the
natural resources of the watershed may be conserved, restored, developed and
managed.”
(j) "To control the flow of surface waters in order to prevent floods or pollution or to
reduce the adverse effects thereof."
(n) “To collaborate and enter into agreements with ministries and agencies of
government, municipal councils and local boards and other organizations.”
These sections provide the Authority with the mandate to develop programs to conserve, restore,
develop and manage the watershed’s natural resources. They provide the basis for the
Authority’s review of planning applications as a commenting agency under the Planning Act as
well as through agreements with its municipalities.
Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act is the basis for the Authority’s regulation and
permitting program. It gives the Authority power to pass regulations in the area of its jurisdiction
as follows:
(a) Restricting and regulating the use of water in or from rivers, streams, inland lakes,
ponds, wetlands and natural or artificially constructed depressions in rivers or streams;
(b) Prohibiting or regulating or requiring the permission of the Authority for the
straightening, changing, diverting or interfering in any way with the existing channel of a
river, creek, stream or watercourse or for changing or interfering in any way with a wetland;
(c) Prohibiting or regulating or requiring the permission of the Authority for development if,
in the opinion of the Authority, the control of flooding, erosion, dynamic beaches or pollution
or the conservation of land may be affected by development;
(d) Providing for the appointment of officers to enforce any regulation made under this
section or Section 29;
(e) Providing for the appointment of persons to act as officers with all the powers and duties
of officers to enforce any regulation made under this section.
9
2.2
Planning Act
The Planning Act sets out the ground rules for land use planning in Ontario and describes how
land use may be controlled, and by whom.
The purpose of the Planning Act is to:
¾ promote sustainable economic development in a healthy natural environment within a
provincial policy framework
¾ provide for a land use planning system led by provincial policy integrate matters of
provincial interest into provincial and municipal planning decisions by requiring all
decision-makers to have regard to the Provincial Policy Statement
¾ provide for planning processes that are fair by making them open, accessible, timely and
efficient
¾ encourage co-operation and coordination among various interests
¾ recognize the decision-making authority and accountability of municipal councils in
planning
¾ provide for the consideration of the provincial interest including the development to the
Provincial Policy Statement which includes protecting and managing our natural
resources
Conservation Authorities participate in this land use planning process under the Planning Act,
through several mechanisms as follows:
¾ Authorities comment on planning applications circulated to them by the municipalities
and approval authorities as prescribed by regulations under the Planning Act
¾ In April 1995, Conservation Authorities were delegated natural hazard responsibilities by
the Minister of Natural Resources
¾ In 2001, a Memorandum of Understanding (Appendix 1) was signed between
Conservation Authorities, and the Ministries of Natural Resources and Municipal Affairs
and Housing confirming the delegated responsibilities, and defining the respective roles
under the Provincial One Window Planning System
¾ NVCA has developed formal agreements with member municipalities (e.g. Simcoe
County, Appendix 2) to provide technical plan input and review support. This includes
providing comments and technical support on natural heritage planning issues as well as
those relating to natural hazards.
2.3
Other Related Legislation
There are several other Acts that staff may need to consider as part of their municipal plan
review and in some cases the permitting processes, including the following:
The Clean Water Act 2006 helps protect drinking water at the source, to safeguard human health
and the environment. A key focus of the legislation is the preparation of locally-developed terms
of reference, science-based assessment reports and source water protection plans. While the
source water protection plans are due to be completed in 2012, there may be opportunities in the
interim to identify and protect vulnerable source water areas under the Planning Act.
Conservation Ontario is currently developing “Interim Guidance for Conservation Authorities on
Integrating Drinking Water Source Protection (DWSP) under the Planning Act.” The purpose of
10
this document will be to provide guidance to CAs on the release and use of interim DWSP
information in municipal land use planning process. Once the guidelines have been completed
staff will follow them as an interim means of assisting member municipalities in protecting their
drinking water resources.
The Green Energy Act (2009)
The Ontario government has introduced the Green Energy Act. The purpose of this Bill is
to “facilitate the development of a sustainable energy economy that protects the environment
while streamlining the approval process, mitigate climate change, engage communities and build
a world-class green industrial sector.” Since most of the green energy projects will be in rural
areas their impacts on the natural environment will have to be assessed as appropriate and
required by the legislation and resulting regulations.
This legislation as well as new Acts may have an impact on the Plan Input and Review process.
These impacts will be assessed and updates will be made to these guidelines as appropriate. For
example, following the completion of the source water protection plans under the Clean Water
Act in 2012; this document will be updated and posted on our website at www.nvca.on.ca
2.3.1
The Federal Fisheries Act
The Federal Fisheries Act’s primary objective is to protect fish habitat; but where necessary and
as a last resort, it may authorize impacts to fish habitat. The NVCA plays a significant role in this
process through an agreement with the Federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans. This
process is outlined below.
The NVCA has a “level 2 agreement” with the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO)
Canada to administer the review of projects under section 35(1) of the Fisheries Act. This section
states that “No person shall carry on any work or undertaking that results in the harmful
alteration, disruption or destruction of fish habitat.”
The Federal Fisheries Act can be accessed at the following link:http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/F-14/
The agreement was established for the conservation and protection of fish habitat and promotion
of good fisheries management. Under this agreement the NVCA conducts the initial review of
projects with the potential to affect fish habitat to determine if there is any harmful alteration,
disruption or destruction of fish habitat.
If there are potential impacts to fish habitat and they can be mitigated, then the NVCA issues a
letter of advice outlining the steps necessary to mitigate these impacts. If the impacts to fish
habitat cannot be fully mitigated, then the project is forwarded to DFO for further review and
approval.
To further assist in the implementation of the Fisheries Act, a multi-agency Inter-Jurisdictional
Compliance Protocol for Fish Habitat and Associated Water Quality was prepared in 2007 by the
federal government and the province of Ontario. The intent of the Protocol is to enhance and
clarify interagency activities regarding the protection of fish habitat and associated water quality.
The protocol summarizes the roles and responsibilities of the various agencies having
11
enforcement and compliance interest in the protection of fish habitat and water quality. This
Protocol is located on the Ministry of Natural Resources website at the following link:
http://www.web2.mnr.gov.on.ca/mnr/ebr/compliance/protocol_en.pdf
2.4
Provincial Policies, Plans and Guidelines
The provincial policies, plans and guidelines outlined in this section provide staff with specific
directions when dealing with Planning Act applications and in some cases permit applications
under the Conservation Authorities Act. The information provided below represents a brief
summary of the documents and policies. Please see the complete document for the details and the
planning context for the policies.
2.4.1
Provincial Policy Statement 2005
The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) provides policy direction on matters of provincial interest
related to land use planning and development. The document sets the policy foundation for
regulating development and use of land.
The Provincial Policy Statement aims to provide for appropriate development while protecting
resources of provincial interest, public health and safety, and the quality of the natural
environment.
The PPS is also complemented by several provincial plans affecting the NVCA including the
Greenbelt, Niagara Escarpment and Oak Ridges Moraine Plans, and most recently the Growth
Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe. These plans are discussed in the following sections.
Particularly important sections of the PPS to the Authority’s Planning Services programs are
included below.
Please note that the PPS is more than a set of individual policies and is intended to be read in its
entirety and the relevant policies are to be applied to each situation. The numbering of the
sections below maintains the PPS numbering. Please see the PPS for its definitions.
Provincial Policy Statement 2005
Part II: LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY
The Provincial Policy Statement is issued under the authority of Section 3 of the Planning
Act and came into effect on March 1, 2005. It applies to all applications, matters or
proceedings commenced on or after March 1, 2005.
In respect of the exercise of any authority that affects a planning matter, Section 3 of the
Planning Act requires that decisions affecting planning matters “shall be consistent
with” policy statements issued under the Act.
Part V:
2.0
POLICIES
WISE USE AND MANAGEMENT OF RESOURCES
12
Ontario's long-term prosperity, environmental health, and social well-being depend on
protecting natural heritage, water, agricultural, mineral and cultural heritage and
archaeological resources for their economic, environmental and social benefits.
Accordingly:
2.1
NATURAL HERITAGE
2.1.1 Natural features and areas shall be protected for the long term.
2.1.2 The diversity and connectivity of natural features in an area, and the long-term
ecological function and biodiversity of natural heritage systems, should be maintained,
restored or, where possible, improved, recognizing linkages between and among natural
heritage features and areas, surface water features and ground water features.
2.1.3 Development and site alteration shall not be permitted in:
a) significant habitat of endangered species and threatened species;
b) significant wetlands in Ecoregions 5E, 6E and 7E; and
c) significant coastal wetlands.
2.1.4 Development and site alteration shall not be permitted in:
a) significant wetlands in the Canadian Shield north of Ecoregions 5E, 6E and 7E;
b) significant woodlands south and east of the Canadian Shield ;
c) significant valleylands south and east of the Canadian Shield;
d) significant wildlife habitat; and
e) significant areas of natural and scientific interest
unless it has been demonstrated that there will be no negative impacts on the natural
features or their ecological functions.
2.1.5 Development and site alteration shall not be permitted in fish habitat except in
accordance with provincial and federal requirements.
2.1.6 Development and site alteration shall not be permitted on adjacent lands to the
natural heritage features and areas identified in policies 2.1.3, 2.1.4 and 2.1.5 unless the
ecological function of the adjacent lands has been evaluated and it has been
demonstrated that there will be no negative impacts on the natural features or on their
ecological functions.
2.1.7 Nothing in policy 2.1 is intended to limit the ability of existing agricultural uses to
continue.
2.2
WATER
2.2.1 Planning authorities shall protect, improve or restore the quality and quantity of
water by:
a) using the watershed as the ecologically meaningful scale for planning;
13
b) minimizing potential negative impacts, including cross-jurisdictional and crosswatershed impacts;
c) identifying surface water features, ground water features, hydrologic functions and
natural heritage features and areas which are necessary for the ecological and
hydrological integrity of the watershed;
d) implementing necessary restrictions on development and site alteration to:
1. protect all municipal drinking water supplies and designated vulnerable areas;
and
2. protect, improve or restore vulnerable surface and ground water,
sensitive surface water features and sensitive ground water features, and their
hydrologic functions;
e) maintaining linkages and related functions among surface water features, ground
water features, hydrologic functions and natural heritage features and areas;
f) promoting efficient and sustainable use of water resources, including practices for
water conservation and sustaining water quality; and
g) ensuring stormwater management practices minimize stormwater volumes and
contaminant loads, and maintain or increase the extent of vegetative and pervious
surfaces
2.2.2 Development and site alteration shall be restricted in or near sensitive surface
water features and sensitive ground water features such that these features and their
related hydrologic functions will be protected, improved or restored.
Mitigative measures and/or alternative development approaches may be required in
order to protect, improve or restore sensitive surface water features, sensitive ground
water features, and their hydrologic functions.
3.0
PROTECTING PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY
Ontario's long-term prosperity, environmental health and social well-being depend on
reducing the potential for public cost or risk to Ontario’s residents from natural or
human-made hazards. Development shall be directed away from areas of natural or
human-made hazards where there is an unacceptable risk to public health or safety or of
property damage.
Accordingly:
3.1
NATURAL HAZARDS
3.1.1 Development shall generally be directed to areas outside of:
a. hazardous lands adjacent to the shorelines of the Great Lakes - St. Lawrence
River System and large inland lakes which are impacted by flooding hazards,
erosion hazards and/or dynamic beach hazards;
b. hazardous lands adjacent to river, stream and small inland lake systems which
are impacted by flooding hazards and/or erosion hazards; and
c. hazardous sites.
14
3.1.2 Development and site alteration shall not be permitted within:
a. the dynamic beach hazard;
b. defined portions of the one hundred year flood level along connecting channels
(the St. Mary's, St. Clair, Detroit, Niagara and St. Lawrence Rivers);
c. areas that would be rendered inaccessible to people and vehicles during times of
flooding hazards, erosion hazards and/or dynamic beach hazards, unless it has
been demonstrated that the site has safe access appropriate for the nature of the
development and the natural hazard; and
d. a floodway regardless of whether the area of inundation contains high points of
land not subject to flooding.
3.1.3 Despite policy 3.1.2, development and site alteration may be permitted in certain
areas identified in policy 3.1.2:
a. in those exceptional situations where a Special Policy Area has been approved.
The designation of a Special Policy Area, and any change or modification to the
site-specific policies or boundaries applying to a Special Policy Area, must be
approved by the Ministers of Municipal Affairs and Housing and Natural
Resources prior to the approval authority approving such changes or
modifications; or
b. where the development is limited to uses which by their nature must locate within
the floodway, including flood and/or erosion control works or minor additions or
passive non-structural uses which do not affect flood flows.
3.1.4 Development shall not be permitted to locate in hazardous lands and hazardous
sites where the use is:
a. an institutional use associated with hospitals, nursing homes, pre-school, school
nurseries, day care and schools, where there is a threat to the safe evacuation of
the sick, the elderly, persons with disabilities or the young during an emergency
as a result of flooding, failure of floodproofing measures or protection works, or
erosion;
b. an essential emergency service such as that provided by fire, police and
ambulance stations and electrical substations, which would be impaired during
an emergency as a result of flooding, the failure of floodproofing measures and/or
protection works, and/or erosion; and
c. uses associated with the disposal, manufacture, treatment or storage of hazardous
substances.
3.1.5 Where the two-zone concept for flood plains is applied, development and site
alteration may be permitted in the flood fringe, subject to appropriate floodproofing to
the flooding hazard elevation or another flooding hazard standard approved by the
Minister of Natural Resources.
15
3.1.6 Further to policy 3.1.5, and except as prohibited in policies 3.1.2 and 3.1.4,
development and site alteration may be permitted in those portions of hazardous lands
and hazardous sites where the effects and risk to public safety are minor so as to be
managed or mitigated in accordance with provincial standards, as determined by the
demonstration and achievement of all of the following:
a. development and site alteration is carried out in accordance with floodproofing
standards, protection works standards, and access standards;
b. vehicles and people have a way of safely entering and exiting the area
during times of flooding, erosion and other emergencies;
c. new hazards are not created and existing hazards are not aggravated; and
d. no adverse environmental impacts will result.
The Provincial Policy Statement must be read in its entirety and all relevant policies are applied
to each situation. The entire policy including definitions can be found at the following Ministry
of Municipal Affairs and Housing link: http://www.mah.gov.on.ca/Page1485.aspx
2.4.1.1 Technical Guidelines Supporting the PPS
2.4.1.1.1 Natural Heritage Reference Manual
The Natural Heritage Reference Manual (Ministry of Natural Resources –June 1999) provides
additional information on technical issues relative to the application of Natural Heritage sections
(2.1) of the Provincial Policy Statement.
The reference manual, developed in consultation with practitioners, represented at the time, the
most up-to-date information available (1999) on specific technical issues relating to the PPS
Natural Heritage policies. For example, how the municipalities can determine the criteria for
their “significant” natural features.
Please note: It is our understanding that a revised version of this document is underway to assist
in implementing the 2005 Provincial Policy Statement. It will be initially posted on the
Environmental Bill of Rights website and once approved it will be posted on the on MNR’s
website at the following link: http://www.mnr.gov.on.ca/en/Publication/index.html
The 1999 Natural Heritage Reference Manual can be found at the following link on MNR’s
website: http://www.mnr.gov.on.ca/en/Business/LUEPS/Publication/249081.html
2.4.1.1.2
Understanding Natural Hazards and the Technical Guidelines for
Great Lakes and Rivers Flood and Erosion Hazards
These publications were prepared by the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources to assist the
public, planning authorities, local municipalities and conservation authorities with an explanation
of the Natural Hazards Policies of the Provincial Policy Statement.
The technical information concerning the implementation of the Natural Hazards Policies is
available in the following documents:
¾ Understanding Natural Hazards (2001);
16
¾ Great Lakes – St. Lawrence River System and Large Inland Lakes Flooding, Erosion and
Dynamic Beach Hazards;
¾ River and Stream Systems Flooding and Erosion Hazards and Hazardous Sites.
The introductory document, and the one most often used by planners “Understanding Natural
Hazards” can be found at the following link on MNR’s website.
http://www.mnr.gov.on.ca/en/Business/Water/Publication/MNR_E002317P.html
Authority staff have access to the two other technical guidelines through both the Planning and
Engineering and Technical Services programs.
2.4.2 Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan
The Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (November 2001) provides policies for the
protection of the ecological and hydrological integrity of the Oak Ridges Moraine. In 2005, the
Oak Ridges Moraine was included within the Greenbelt Planning Area; however the Oak Ridges
Moraine Plan remains the guiding document.
The plan covers a small portion of the NVCA’s watershed in the southern headwaters of the
upper Nottawasaga within the municipalities of New Tecumseth, Adjala-Tosorontio and Mono.
The vast majority of the Authority’s portion of the moraine is within the Innisfil Creek
subwatershed. However, there are also two small tributaries to the Upper Nottawasaga River in
the vicinity of the village of Hockley with their headwaters in the moraine. One is located in the
Township of Adjala-Tosorontio and the other in the Town of Mono.
The Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan requires that all decisions made under the Planning
or Condominium Acts must conform to this plan. In addition, the NVCA along with other
conservation authorities on the moraine, agreed to use their best efforts to ensure that all permits
issued under the Conservation Authorities Act, be in conformity with the Oak Ridges Moraine
Conservation Plan. This approach was confirmed by NVCA’s Executive Committee on June 28,
2002 stating, “that staff be directed to administer all Conservation Authority permit applications
for lands on the Oak Ridges Moraine in conformity with the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation
Plan.”
Guidelines were also prepared in November 2003 to assist staff issuing permits in meeting this
commitment. They are included in Appendix 3.
The Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan and land use designations map can be found on the
Ministry of Municipal affaires and Housing’s website at the following link:
http://www.mah.gov.on.ca/Page323.aspx
In addition, the Oak Ridges Moraine mapping including the land use designations, wetlands and
significant woodlands are located on the GIS directory for Authority staff.
2.4.2.1 Oak Ridges Moraine Technical Guidelines
The Ministry of Municipal Affairs, in conjunction with the Ministry of the Environment and the
Ministry of Natural Resources, has developed a series of technical papers to assist in the
implementation of the policies and application of some of the technical requirements contained
17
in various sections of the Plan. The technical papers were prepared based on the best science and
information available at the time of preparation. They represent the province’s approach to
implementing the Plan’s policies and provide clarification and assistance for the implementation
of these policies.
The Technical Guidelines are located on the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing website
at the following link: http://www.mah.gov.on.ca/Page4808.aspx
2.4.3 Niagara Escarpment Plan
The Niagara Escarpment Plan (June 2005) along the west side of the watershed, applies to a
significant portion of Mulmur and Clearview townships, and the towns of Mono and The Blue
Mountains.
The Niagara Escarpment Planning and Development Act established a planning process to
ensure that the area would be protected. The Niagara Escarpment Plan serves as a framework of
objectives and policies to strike a balance between development, preservation and the enjoyment
of this important resource. In 2005, the Niagara Escarpment Plan was included within the
Greenbelt Planning Area; however the Niagara Escarpment Plan remains the guiding document.
Authority staff provide comments to the Niagara Escarpment Commission on the development
permit applications and Niagara Escarpment Plan amendments.
The Niagara Escarpment Plan is located on the government website at:
http://www.escarpment.org/Publications/plan_intro.htm
2.4.4 Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe
The Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (GGH) covers all of the NVCA’s area of
jurisdiction except those lands within Grey County.
The Growth Plan (June 16th 2006) sets clear standards for growth and development.
The Plan:
¾ Establishes coordinated population and job growth forecasts for municipalities as the
basis for planning.
¾ Encourages revitalization of downtowns and city centres, making them more vibrant,
people-oriented and attractive.
¾ Reduces development pressures on agricultural lands and natural areas by directing more
growth to existing urban areas
¾ Ensures that new development is planned to create complete communities that offer more
choices in housing, better transit and a range of amenities like shops, schools,
entertainment and services that are closer to where people live.
¾ Identifies 25 downtown locations in the GGH (including Barrie ), that will be focal points
for accommodating people and jobs, through initiatives that offer attractive new living
options within easy access to shops and services. These centres will also support transit
and the economy of the surrounding area.
18
¾ Complements the province’s Greenbelt Plan that protects 1.8 million acres of valuable
farmland and natural areas at the heart of the Greater Golden Horseshoe.
¾ Establishes an integrated transportation network that will offer more transportation
choices for getting from place to place, reducing congestion on our roads.
¾ Links planning for growth with planning for infrastructure, so that the roads, sewers,
schools and other infrastructure is in place to meet the needs of growing communities.
This plan is an important policy document for the Authority. It will be implemented by the
municipalities through updates to their official plans.
The plan directs almost all development to “settlement areas” which may take pressure off the
rural natural heritage systems and the intensification of development with the urban centres may
make it easier to implement enhanced best management practices to protect water quality.
The Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe is located on the Ministry Energy and
Infrastructure website at the following link: http://www.placestogrow.ca
2.4.5 The Greenbelt Plan
The Greenbelt Plan (February, 2005) is an overarching strategy that provides clarity and
certainty about urban structure, where and how future growth should be accommodated, and
what must be protected for current and future generations.
The Greenbelt Plan identifies where urbanization should not occur in order to provide permanent
protection to the agricultural land base and the ecological features and functions occurring on
this landscape.
The Greenbelt planning area also includes the Niagara Escarpment and the Oak Ridges Moraine;
however their plans still provide the direction for those areas. The 10 year review for the
Greenbelt plan may address the need to harmonize all three plans.
The NVCA has only a very small portion of the Greenbelt Plan within its watershed (other than
the Niagara Escarpment and Oak Ridges Moraine Lands).The lands (approximately 1,400 acres)
are located in the southern portion of the Town of Mono in the vicinity of Lots 4 and 5, Con 1 to
5.
The Greenbelt Plan can be found on the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing website at
the following link: http://www.mah.gov.on.ca/Page189.aspx#greenbelt
2.4.6 Provincial Delegation of Authority and Memorandum of Understanding
A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between Conservation Authorities, the Ministry of
Natural Resources, and the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing was signed in early 2001.
The MOU defines the roles and relationships between the three agencies in planning for
implementation of conservation authority delegated responsibilities under the Provincial One
Window Planning System.
Conservation Authorities were delegated natural hazard responsibilities by the Minister of
Natural Resources in April 1995. The delegation from the MNR including flood plain
19
management, hazardous slopes, Great Lakes shorelines, unstable soils and erosion which are
now encompassed by Section 3.1 “Natural Hazards” of the Provincial Policy Statement. In this
delegated role, the conservation authority is responsible for representing the “provincial interest”
on these matters in planning exercises where the province is not involved.
The NVCA, under the authority of the Conservation Authorities Act, and in conjunction with its
municipal partners, developed business plans, watershed and subwatershed plans and natural
resource management plans within its area of jurisdictions.
These plans recommend specific approaches to land use and resource planning and management
that should be incorporated into municipal planning documents and related development
applications in order to be implemented. The NVCA is involved in the review of municipal
planning documents and development applications under the Planning Act. The Authority works
with its municipal partners to ensure that these specific approaches are addressed in land use
decisions made by the municipal planning authorities.
In this role, the NVCA represents its program and policy interests as a watershed based resource
management agency and as a commenting agency under the Planning Act. Please see Appendix
1 for the details of the Memorandum of Understanding.
20
3.0
NVCA’S STRATEGIC DIRECTIONS, POLICY AND GUIDELINES
In addition to the provincial legislation, plans, policies and guidelines outlined above to guide
staff, the NVCA has its own set of directions documents. They range from broad strategic
direction, to specific policies and measurable targets. In order to keep these guidelines as concise
as possible, this section provides a brief summary of these documents and the links to the
complete version.
3.1
Watershed Plan (1996) and Watershed Plan Strategic Review (December
2006)
To assist conservation authorities in strategic and watershed planning, the province has prepared
several comprehensive guidelines including:
¾ Water Management on a Watershed Basis: Implementing and Ecosystems approach, June
1993
¾ Subwatershed Planning, June 1993
¾ Integrating Water Management Objectives into Municipal Planning Documents – June
1993
¾ Watershed Plans, Water Budgets and other technical guidelines for the Oak Ridges
Moraine
These documents helped guide the development of NVCA’s watershed and subwatershed plans
and are available on the Ministry of Natural Resources website at the following link:
http://www.mnr.gov.on.ca/en/Publication/index.html
In 1996 the NVCA completed its first Watershed Plan to provide an overview of its watersheds
and address broad water related issues. It dealt with water management issues across the entire
Nottawasaga, Batteaux and Pretty rivers, and Black Ash and Silver creek watersheds, a total
drainage area of 3,361km2.
In 2006 a strategic review of the 1996 Watershed Plan was completed to address the issues that
have arisen since the plan was completed. This review examined and updated the Watershed
Plan’s strategic directions, issues, recommendations, and assessed the effectiveness of its
implementation.
To assist with this assessment the strategic review added measurable targets for the Watershed
Plan’s goal and objectives. The targets are to be adjusted and new ones added as appropriate
through the Authority’s business planning process. The targets are quite specific. For example to
protect water quality and fish and wildlife habitats, 75% of all streams (not including drains)
should be naturally vegetated for 30m on both sides of the stream.
The strategic review highlighted the importance of integrating the Watershed Plan with the
business planning process as this was the mechanism to actually implement the Watershed Plan.
As a result, the NVCA has developed an annual business and budget planning process that
directs the implementation of the Plan’s strategic directions and provides a mechanism to keep
the Plan current by updating its targets. In this manner it can also quickly react to implement
appropriate local and provincial initiatives.
21
The Watershed Plan Strategic Review was approved by the Authority’s Board of Directors on
November 24th 2006. It is considered an amendment to the 1996 Watershed Plan and represents
NVCA policy.
The Watershed Plan and the Strategic Review documents are available on the Authority’s
website at the following link:
http://www.nvca.on.ca/OurProgramsandServices/Planning/PlanningManagementPlans/index.htm
3.2
Subwatershed Plans (Black Ash, Willow and Innisfil Creeks)
Subwatershed Plans have been completed for three of the Authority’s subwatersheds - Black Ash
Creek, Willow Creek and Innisfil Creek. These subwatersheds were chosen as a result of
significant water management issues. The primary issue with Black Ask Creek was the potential
for flooding within the Town of Collingwood. Willow Creek has it headwaters in the Oro
Moraine (a significant landform of particular interest to its municipalities) and includes Little
Lake and portions of Minesing Wetland. Innisfil Creek was studied as it is the Authority’s most
impacted water course, with summer low flow issues and nutrient loading problems.
The subwatershed plans provided a mechanism for dealing with the specific water management
issues across municipal boundaries sharing both the costs and benefits.
The subwatershed plans provide an ecosystems approach helping to coordinate all water related
issues and incorporating provincial and local initiatives (e.g. the Oak Ridges Moraine
Conservation Plan requirements). They provide valuable information for input into local
municipal planning documents as well as a strong foundation for other technical studies that may
be required to address a specific issue (e.g. Innisfil Creek’s low flow conditions).
The three subwatershed plans provide additional direction for the resource management of those
subwatersheds.
The subwatershed plans are located on the Authority’s website listed below
http://www.nvca.on.ca/OurProgramsandServices/Planning/PlanningManagementPlans/index.htm
3.3
NVCA’s Three Year Business Plan and Annual Budget
The Business Plan is a very important document providing staff with direction by assigning
program priorities and funding through the budget process.
The Business Plan provides a forum and a tool for Board Members and staff that:
¾ Helps them gain an understanding of the Authority’s roles and responsibilities;
¾ Provides direction to staff through the review and approval of appropriate programs and
implementation strategies related to the achievement of NVCA targets;
¾ Provides the foundation for the development and implementation of the annual budget
and two-year financial forecasts; and
¾ Informs and updates municipal councils and staff on NVCA programs.
22
In addition to providing this forum for Board Members, the Business Plan implements the
Authority’s strategic directions (goal, objectives, targets and recommendations) as outlined in the
Watershed Plan, by developing specific implementation strategies for each program. The
Business Plan will also annually track the successes in achieving the watershed targets.
3.4
Conservation Land Protection and Acquisition Policy - May 2002
The purpose of the Conservation Land Protection and Acquisition Policy (CLPAP) is to establish
a framework to provide staff with a basis for identifying conservation lands for protection and
for pursuing certain lands for acquisition through the land use planning process. In particular the
purpose of this policy is to:
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
Help secure significant conservation lands within the watershed in perpetuity
Increase the public ownership of conservation lands in the watershed
Foster relationships with conservation organizations for land securement
Augment the conservation land base in the watershed for research and analysis
Communicate the importance of conservation land protection and acquisition
Acquisition
Through the land use planning process, the NVCA will pursue the acquisition of conservation
lands eligible for the Conservation Land Tax Incentive Program (CLTIP). These lands will not
result in an increased tax burden to the NVCA and include:
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
Provincially significant wetlands
Provincially significant Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest (ANSIs)
Niagara Escarpment lands (Escarpment Natural Areas designation)
Habitat of endangered species
Community conservation lands
Community Conservation Lands are natural areas of significance owned by non-profit charitable
conservation organizations and conservation authorities and are eligible for tax relief under
CLTIP.
The acquisition of these lands through the land development process will occur as a condition of
development (e.g. condition of draft plan approval) and through fair and equitable negotiations.
Other conservation lands may be acquired at the discretion and approval of the Authority’s
Board of Directors. These lands could include significant woodlands which would be eligible for
the Managed Forest Tax Incentive Program (MFTIP) or other lands that would further the goals
and objectives of the Watershed Plan.
Protection
When reviewing land use proposals, the NVCA may require the establishment of conservation
easements under the Conservation Land Act on private property for those lands not qualifying for
acquisition. The conservation easement will be in favour of the NVCA and will be policed by
staff. Other land use protection controls such as zoning will be used where appropriate.
23
The details of the Conservation Land Protection and Acquisition Policy are provided in
Appendix 4
3.5
Pond Policy - May 2005
There has been an increase in the number of proposals for the construction of new ponds and the
modification of existing ponds. Ponds have an impact on our watershed, thus it is important to
manage and monitor their effects on a cumulative basis over time.
The purpose of this policy is to establish a framework that will:
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
Protect water resources
Direct pond development away from environmentally significant areas
Prevent flooding hazards through proper pond design and re-design
Promote the proper design, operation and maintenance of ponds
Monitor the effects of ponds in the watershed on a cumulative basis
Promote the consistent review of applications for pond development
Communicate and educate the general public on proper pond development
Clarify the landowner’s responsibility regarding pond maintenance and restoration in
order to ensure human safety and protect properties located downstream of a pond
¾ Establish a policy framework for the re-establishment of on-line ponds.
The details of the Pond Policy are provided in Appendix 5
3.6
Engineering’s Technical Development Review Guidelines (Stormwater
Management)
The Authority’s Engineering Services has prepared technical standards for the review of
Stormwater Management Plans. These Development Review Guidelines were established to
provide a fair, reasonable and uniform basis for stormwater management approvals. The
guidelines require a systems approach to resource management including both upstream and
downstream water quality and quantity considerations for all development, as emphasized within
the Watershed Plan. They outline policies specific to the NVCA, summarize typical application
information required for NVCA technical review, and outline standard parameters to be applied
throughout the watershed. The guidelines present procedures, computation methods, and input
parameters that are commonly accepted by NVCA staff, however it is still the designer's
responsibility to recommend and justify the most appropriate methods. If the designer determines
that alternative procedures, computation methods, or parameters are required to best describe the
development site, an explanation of the rationale acceptable to the NVCA must be provided. The
application of hydrologic / hydraulic computer simulation models to drainage design should be
undertaken with sound engineering judgment.
The most up-to-date version of Engineering Services Development Review Guidelines is located
on the NVCA website under Engineering and Technical Services at the following link:
http://www.nvca.on.ca/OurProgramsandServices/EngineeringTechnicalServices/DevelopmentRe
viewGuidelines/index.htm
24
4.0
GUIDELINES TO SUPPORT THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE
AUTHORITY’S SECTION 28 REGULATION
To help maintain consistency with other conservation authorities, the following guidelines mirror
the Conservation Ontario guidelines titled: Draft Guidelines to support Administration of the
“Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses
Regulation” dated April 21, 2008.
On April 28, 2008 Conservation Ontario Council approved the following resolution:
THAT the “Draft Guidelines to Support Conservation Authority Administration of the
Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and
Watercourses Regulation” be endorsed for submission to MNR for approval
AND THAT the document be circulated to CA staff for consideration relative to their
Conservation Authority’s administration of the regulatory program (C.W.# 12/08 ).
Leading up to the above resolution, the MNR/Conservation Ontario Committee drafted and
conducted extensive internal review of the draft guideline, including eight regional consultation
sessions in 2007 and 2008 for conservation authority staff.
It is our understanding that the Conservation Ontario Guidelines will be made available for
public review through the MNR posting on the Environmental Bill of Rights website. Once the
document has been approved by MNR, the Conservation Ontario Guidelines will be posted on
their website. The NVCA’s guidelines may be adjusted as appropriate and if so, notices will be
sent to our stakeholders and posted on our website.
The NVCA’s guidelines will assist staff in the review of permit applications by providing a
comprehensive outline of the Authority’s technical standards and requirements (e.g. setbacks
from streams and wetlands etc.).
In some cases there may be a need for coordination between planning applications and those
under the Authority’s Regulation and Permitting Program. This can also be complicated by the
fact that the two applications may be received years apart. The Authority will ensure that its
position on a Planning Act application is the same as its position on a permit application for the
same property; except where planning policies supported by the PPS, municipal official plans or
the Authority’s Board of Directors, may be more restrictive. The principal of development is
determined through the review process under the Planning Act.
The following outlines the process that was followed to create the NVCA’s specific regulation
(172/06) under Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act:
¾ Ontario Regulation 97/04 “Content of Conservation Authority Regulations under
Subsection 28 (1) of the Act: Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations
to Shorelines and Watercourses” (i.e. Generic Regulation) was approved in May 2004.
This Regulation established the content requirements to be met in a regulation made by a
Conservation Authority under Subsection 28(1) of the Conservation Authorities Act.
25
¾ In 2006, the Minister of Natural Resources approved the Development, Interference and
Alteration Regulations (individual conservation authority regulations) for all conservation
authorities consistent with Ontario Regulation 97/04 of the Conservation Authorities Act.
The NVCA’s individual Ontario Regulation is 172/06.
4.1
Procedures for the Implementation of Ontario Regulation 172/06
In February of 2007, the NVCA Board of Directors approved the administrative Procedures for
the Implementation of Ontario Regulation 172/06. Please consult this document for the
procedures related to the processing of permit applications, violation investigations, application
refusals and the hearing and appeals processes. This document also contains the NVCA’s
complete Ontario Regulation 172/06.
These procedures and Regulation 172/06 are located on the Authority’s website at the following
link:
http://www.nvca.on.ca/OurProgramsandServices/Planning/PlanningPolicies/index.htm.
4.2
Background to NVCA’s Generic Regulation 172/06
Section 28(1) of the Conservation Authorities Act, allows conservation authorities to make
regulations “prohibiting, regulating or requiring permission of the authority for development if,
in the opinion of the authority, the control of flooding, erosion, dynamic beaches or pollution or
the conservation of land may be affected by the development.”
The Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority’s first regulation was the Fill, Construction and
Alteration to Waterways Regulation (Ontario Regulation 164 R.R.O. 1990), and was part of an
overall water management program for many years including:
¾ flood forecasting & warning;
¾ information & education;
¾ the construction & maintenance of flood control works; and
¾ environmental land use planning
In order to streamline the regulatory framework for development approvals and provide greater
consistency, the province of Ontario made changes to the Conservation Authorities Act in 1997.
All conservation authorities were directed to produce a local regulation that complied with the
Generic Regulation (Ontario Regulation 97/04) by May 1, 2006.
As a result on May 4th 2006, the NVCA’s first Ontario Regulation 164 R.R.O.1990 was replaced
by the generic regulation known as the Development, Interference with Wetlands and
Watercourses Regulation (Ontario Regulation 172/06).
The regulation is located on the Authority’s website at the following link:
http://www.nvca.on.ca/OurProgramsandServices/Planning/PlanningPolicies/index.htm
The NVCA’s Ontario Regulation 172/06 essentially outlines what and where the Authority can
regulate. Specifically, this regulation allows the Authority to:
¾ Prohibit, regulate or provide permission for straightening, changing, diverting or
interfering in any way with the existing channel of a river, creek, stream, watercourse or
changing or interfering with a wetland.
26
¾ Prohibit, regulate or provide permission for development if the control of flooding,
erosion, dynamic beaches, pollution or the conservation of land may be affected by the
development
A principal mandate of the Authority is to prevent the loss of life and property due to flooding
and erosion, and to conserve and enhance natural resources. This regulation is a key tool in
fulfilling this mandate because it prevents or restricts development in areas where the control of
flooding, erosion, dynamic beaches, pollution or the conservation of land may be affected by
development.
The following types of lands are regulated:
¾
¾
¾
¾
Ravines, valleys, steep slopes (escarpment areas),
Wetlands including swamps, marshes, bogs, fens and ponds,
Any river, creek, flood plain or valley land,
Lake shorelines.
Areas regulated by the NVCA have been mapped in accordance with guidelines from the
Ministry of Natural Resources and Conservation Ontario. However, it is very important to note
that in case of a conflict, the description of those areas in Section 2(1) of the Regulation
172/06 shall prevail over the regulated areas shown on the maps Section 2(2).
The maps depicting the regulated area are located on the Authority’s website at the following
link:
http://www.nvca.on.ca/OurProgramsandServices/Planning/PlanningDevelopmentInterferencewit
hWetlandsandAlterationstoShorelinesandWatercoursesRegulation/index.htm
The following is an example of regulated areas:
Figure 1: Cross section through a typical regulated area.
27
Please note that for wetlands the regulated area includes “Other Areas” where
development could interfere with the hydraulic function of a wetland and may include a
buffer.
The following activities must be approved by the NVCA if the applicant’s lands are located
within a regulated area:
¾ the construction, reconstruction, erection or placing of a building or structure of any kind
with the exception of minor works such as decks, fences, playground equipment and
structures less than 10 square metres (107 square feet ) in size;
¾ changes that would alter the use or potential use of a building or structure;
¾ increase the size of a building or structure or increase the number of dwelling units in the
building or structure;
¾ site grading;
¾ the temporary or permanent placing, dumping or removal of any material originating on
the site or elsewhere;
¾ the straightening, changing or diverting or interfering with the existing channel of a river,
creek, stream or watercourse; or
¾ changing or interfering with a wetland.
4.3
River or Stream Valleys
4.3.1 NVCA’s Regulation 172/06
The following section identifies how the extent of river or stream valleys is determined for the
purpose of administering the Regulation.
The NVCA’s Regulation contains the following sections dealing with river or stream valleys.
Development prohibited
2.(1)
Subject to section 3, no person shall undertake development or permit
another person to undertake development in or on areas within the jurisdiction of the
Authority that are,
(b)
river or stream valleys that have depressional features associated with a
river or stream, whether or not they contain a watercourse, the limits of
which are determined in accordance with the following rules:
(i)
where the river or stream valley is apparent and has stable slopes, the
valley extends from the stable top of bank, plus 15 metres, to a similar
point on the opposite side,
(ii)
where the river or stream valley is apparent and has unstable slopes, the
valley extends from the predicted long term stable slope projected from
the existing stable toe of the slope or, if the toe of the slope is unstable,
from the predicted location of the toe of slope as a result of stream erosion
over a projected 100-year period, plus 15 metres, to a similar point on the
opposite side,
28
(iii)
where the river or stream valley is not apparent, the valley extends the
greater of,
A.
the distance from a point outside the edge of the maximum extent
of the floodplain under the applicable flood event standard, plus 15
metres, to a similar point on the opposite side, and
B.
the distance from the predicted meander belt of a
watercourse, expanded as required to convey the flood
flows under the applicable flood event standard, plus 15
metres, to a similar point on the opposite side.
Permission to develop
3. (1) The Authority may grant permission for development in or on the
areas described in subsection 2(1) if, in its opinion, the control of flooding, erosion,
dynamic beaches, pollution or the conservation of land will not be affected by the
development.
(2) The permission of the Authority shall be given in writing, with or without conditions.
4.3.2 Additional Definitions
The following section provides additional definitions to those in Section 6.0 of this document.
To define the Regulation Limits for river and stream valleys, it is important to understand the
landforms through which they flow. While there are many different types of systems, the
application of the Regulation Limit for rivers and stream systems is based on two simplified
landforms, as explained in the Technical Guide – River and Stream Systems (MNR, 2002a and
MNR 2002b):
Apparent1 (confined) river and stream valleys: are ones in which the physical
presence of a valley corridor containing a river or stream channel, which may or
may not contain flowing water, is visibly discernible (i.e. valley walls are clearly
definable) from the surrounding landscape by either field investigations, aerial
photography and/or map interpretation. The location of the river or stream
channel may be located at the base of the valley slope, in close proximity to the
toe of the valley slope (i.e. within 15 metres), or removed from the toe of the
valley slope (i.e. greater than 15 metres).
Not Apparent (unconfined) river and stream valleys: are ones in which a river
or stream is present but there is no discernible valley slope or bank that can be
detected from the surrounding landscape. For the most part, unconfined systems
are found in fairly flat or gently rolling landscapes and may be located within the
1
The NVCA’s regulation describes river or stream valleys as “apparent” and “not apparent.”
Provincial Technical Guides utilize the terminology ‘confined’ and ‘unconfined,’ respectively.
29
headwater areas of drainage basins. The river or stream channels contain either
perennial (i.e., year round) or ephemeral (i.e. seasonal or intermittent) flow and
range in channel configuration from seepage and natural channels to detectable
channels.
4.3.3
Discussion of River or Stream Valleys
To provide guidance in regulating river and stream valleys, it is necessary to highlight their
hydrological and ecological functions.
4.3.3.1
Processes and Functions of River or Stream Valleys
River or stream valleys are shaped and re-shaped by the natural processes of erosion, slope
stability and flooding. Erosion and slope stability are two natural processes that are quite
different in nature yet often linked together. Erosion is essentially the continual loss of earth
material (i.e. soil or sediment) over time as a result of the influence of water or wind. Slope
stability, usually described in terms of the potential for slope failure, refers to a mass movement
of earth material, or soil, sliding down a bank or slope face as a result of a single event in time.
The degree and frequency with which the physical change will occur in these systems depends
on the interaction of a number of interrelated factors including hydraulic flow, channel
configuration, sediment load in the system, storage and recharge functions, and the stability of
banks, bed and adjacent slopes. The constant shaping and re-shaping of the river and stream
systems by the physical processes result in hazardous conditions that pose a risk to life and cause
property damages.
Erosion hazards mean the loss of land, due to human or natural processes, that pose a threat to
life and property. The erosion hazard limit is determined using the 100-year erosion rate (the
average annual rate of recession extended over a hundred year time span), and includes
allowances for toe erosion, meander belt, and slope stability. The erosion hazard component of
river and stream systems is intended to address both erosion potential of the actual river and
stream bank, as well as erosion or potential slope stability issues related to valley walls.
Flooding of river or stream systems typically occurs following the spring freshet and may occur
again as a result of extreme rainfall events. Rivers naturally accommodate flooding within their
valleys. Historically, development occurred in floodplain areas because of the availability of
water for power, transportation, energy, waste assimilation, and domestic and industrial
consumption. However, floodplain development is susceptible to flooding which can result in
property damage and/or loss of life.
In Ontario, either storm centred events, observed events, or a flood frequency based event may
be used to determine the extent of the Regulatory floodplain. The Timmons Storm flood event
standard applies to all watersheds within the NVCA except for Georgian Bay where the 100 year
flood level plus wave uprush applies.
River and stream systems may contain lands that are not subject to flooding or erosion.
Examples of these non-hazardous lands include isolated flat plateau areas or areas of gentle
slopes (see Figure 2). In these situations the Authority will determine the applicability of the
Regulation.
30
Figure 2: Regulated river or stream valley containing non-hazardous valley lands.
River and stream systems also provide physical, biological and chemical support functions for
sustaining ecosystems. These functions are directly associated with the physical processes of
discharge, erosion, deposition and transport which are inherent in any river and stream system.
The interplay between surface and ground water and the linkages, interactions and interdependence of aquatic environments with terrestrial environments supply hydrologic and
ecological functions critical to sustaining watershed ecosystems. Given that ecological
sustainability is based on the dynamic nature of these systems, it is essential that they be allowed
to function in as natural a state as possible.
4.3.3.2
Defining River or Stream Valleys
The limit of the river or stream valley is the furthest extent of the erosion hazard or flooding
hazard plus an allowance. The following sections describe how the various components of a river
or stream valley are determined.
Erosion Hazard/ Physical Feature
For the purpose of defining the regulated area, the extent of the erosion hazard is based on
whether or not a valley is apparent (confined) or not apparent (unconfined) and whether or not
the valley slopes are stable, unstable, and/or subject to toe erosion.
Apparent (Confined) River or Stream Valley where the valley slopes are stable (see Figure
3).
The Regulation Limit associated with the erosion hazard consists of:
¾ the river or stream valley extending to the stable top of slope
¾ an allowance of 15 metres from the stable top of slope
31
Figure 3: Apparent river or stream valley where the valley slopes are stable.
Apparent (Confined) river or stream valley associated with unstable slopes and stable toe
(see Figure 4):
¾ the river or stream valley including the predicted long term stable slope
projected from the existing stable toe of slope
Figure 4: Apparent river or stream valley associated with unstable slopes and stable toe.
Apparent (Confined) river or stream valley with unstable slopes and active toe erosion (see
Figure 5):
32
¾ the river or stream valley including the long term stable slope projected from the
predicted stable toe of slope
Figure 5: Apparent river or stream valley with unstable slopes and active toe erosion
Not Apparent (Unconfined) river or stream valley (see Figure 6):
The Regulation Limit associated with the erosion hazard consists of2:
¾ the maximum extent of the predicted meander belt of the river or stream
¾ an allowance of 15 metres from the edge of the predicted meander belt
2
In river or stream valleys that are not apparent (unconfined), the regulated area is the greater of the
maximum extent of the Regulatory floodplain or the maximum extent of the predicted meander belt plus an
allowance of 15 metres.
33
Figure 6: Not Apparent river or stream valley (meander belt)
Technical Analysis for Erosion Hazards
Frequently technical analysis is required to determine the appropriate toe erosion, slope stability,
and meander belt allowances. Technical studies should be carried out by a qualified
professional, with recognized expertise in the appropriate discipline, and should be prepared
using established procedures and recognized methodologies to the satisfaction of the
conservation authority. With respect to riverine erosion hazards, technical studies should be in
keeping with the Technical Guide – River and Stream Systems: Erosion Hazard Limit, OMNR,
2002b, and must demonstrate that there is no increased risk to life or property
The Technical Guide provides four methods of determining the toe erosion allowance. The
technical guide also states that toe erosion rates are best determined through long-term
measurements and that a minimum of 25 years of data is recommended for erosion assessment
rates. Sections 3.0, 3.1, 4.1 and 4.3 of the Technical Guide are particularly relevant in this
regard. It is essential that qualified professionals properly characterize the watercourse in
question to identify what processes are occurring. For channels where processes indicative of
instability, such as down-cutting, are identified, very detailed fluvial geomorphic analyses would
likely be required to predict erosion rates. As well, watercourses in catchments experiencing
rapid land use change where the sediment and hydrologic regimes are changing could be
experiencing erosion rates that are shifting in response and that rate of change may not be
quantifiable without significant detailed analysis.
Sections 3.0, 3.2, 4.1 and 4.3 of the Technical Guide provide important direction with respect to
slope stability analysis. Slope stability analysis should also be undertaken in accordance with the
Geotechnical Principles for Stable Slopes, Terraprobe Limited for Ontario Ministry of Natural
Resources, 1994. Recognized analytical methods should be utilized. An appropriate Factor of
Safety should be incorporated into all designs/analysis based on the consequences or risks to land
use or life in the event of a slope failure. Recommended minimum Factors of Safety are
provided in the Technical Guide based on land use above or below the slope (Table 4.3, Page 60,
Technical Guide – River and Stream Systems: Erosion Hazard Limit, MNR, 2002b). These
34
Factors of Safety should also be increased when necessary to account for the reliability of the
information available for the technical analysis due to aspects such as natural soil variability in
the subject area, limited site work due to constraints, etc.
The determination of the appropriate meander belt allowance usually involves a wide range of
study areas such as geomorphology, engineering, ecology and biology. The existing and the
ultimate configuration of the channel in the future must be considered. Due to the challenges in
assessing meander belt widths, more than one method of determining the meander belt width
may be required for any given application. Sections 3.0, 3.3 and 4.4 of the Technical Guide and
the supporting documentation entitled “Belt Width Delineation Procedures’ (Prent and Parish,
2001) provide further details.
Within not apparent valleys, there may be on occasion areas within the meander belt allowance
that are not actually susceptible to erosion within a 100 year planning horizon. These areas may
arise for a variety of reasons such as, but not limited to, soil type, hydraulic regime changes,
implementation of publicly-owned erosion protection works, etc. In these areas, some
development, particularly development associated with existing uses, may be considered as the
development would not be susceptible to actual stream erosion over the 100 year planning
horizon.
When assessing an application for development within any type of valley system, consideration
must be given to the ability for the public and emergency operations personnel to safely access
through the valley system for emergency purposes, regular maintenance to existing structures or
to repair failed structures.
As part of the review of an application, the Authority may request an Environmental Impact
Study (EIS) to address development within erosion hazards. An EIS is a mechanism for
assessing impacts to determine the suitability of a proposal. The submission of an EIS does not
guarantee approval of the works. An EIS must be carried out by a qualified professional, with
recognized expertise in the appropriate area of concern and shall be prepared using established
procedures and recognized methodologies to the satisfaction of the conservation authority.
Appendix 6 provides additional details on what the scope of an EIS may contain.
Flooding Hazard
In Ontario, either storm-centred events, flood frequency based events, or an observed event may
be used to determine the extent of the Regulatory Floodplain3. These events are:
a) A storm-centred event, either Hurricane Hazel storm (1954) or Timmins storm
(1961). A storm-centred event refers to a major storm of record which is used for
land use planning purposes. The rainfall actually experienced during a major storm
event can be transposed over another watershed and when combined with the local
conditions, Regulatory floodplains can be determined. This centred concept is
considered acceptable where the evidence suggests that the storm event could have
potentially occurred over other watersheds in the general area.
3
High points of land not subject to flooding but surrounded by floodplain or "flooded land" are considered to
be within the flood hazard and part of the regulated floodplain.
35
b) 100-year flood event is a frequency based flood event that is determined through
analysis of precipitation, snow melt, or a combination thereof, having a return period
(or a probability of occurrence) of once every 100 years on average (or having a 1%
chance of occurring or being exceeded in any given year). The 100-year flood event
is the minimum acceptable standard for defining the Regulatory floodplain.
c) An observed event, which is a flood that is greater that the storm-centred events or
greater that the 100 year flood and which was actually experienced in a particular
watershed, or portion thereof, for example as a result of ice jams4, and which has been
approved as the standard for that specific area by the Minister of Natural Resources.
The flood standard used to define floodplain limits for the NVCA is a “Flood produced by
the Timmins Storm (1961) or the 100 year Flood, whichever is greater.”
The Regulatory floodplain for river or stream valley systems is defined as the area adjacent to the
watercourse which would be inundated by a flood event resulting from the Timmins Storm or by
the 100 year frequency based event.
The regulated area includes the floodplain and for not apparent valley systems, an allowance.
The allowance is not to exceed 15 metres and is a setback from the hazard (Figure 7).
Figure 7: Regulated area of floodplain for a not apparent valley
Within Ontario, there are three policy concepts for floodplain management: one-zone, two-zone
and special policy area.
One-Zone
In most river or stream valleys in Ontario, a one-zone concept is applied. This area
encompasses the entire regulatory flood plain as shown in figure 8.
4
However, localized chronic conditions (e.g. ice or debris jams) related to flood prone areas may be used to
extend the regulated area beyond the Regulatory Flood limit without the approval of the Minister of Natural
Resources. It will be necessary to inform the property owner(s) as well as ensuring that the revised limits are
reflected in the appropriate municipal documents at the first opportunity.
36
Figure 8: One-zone concept flooding hazard limit
Two-Zone
For areas adjacent to existing urban or built-up areas, where it can be demonstrated by the
municipality that the one-zone approach is too restrictive, selective application of the two-zone
concept Figure 9 may be considered. The municipality, conservation authority and MNR
(regional engineer) must agree to this approach. Development may be permitted within those
portions of the floodplain where the depths and velocities of flooding are low (flood fringe) and
provincial floodproofing and access standards can be met.
The two-zone concept is not intended to be applied throughout an entire subwatershed, but
limited to areas or reaches where it may be appropriate due to the nature of the flood hazard and
the existing “urbanized” development conditions.
Figure 9: Two-zone concept, flooding hazard limit
The two- zone concept permits new development or redevelopment in the flood fringe provided
that it is protected to the level of the Regulatory Flood. The two-zone concept may be considered
where the Authority, in cooperation with the municipality, agrees that based on the local
circumstances, the application of the concept is suitable. The feasibility of a two-zone requires
the examination of a number of factors and implementation requires that various conditions be
37
met. Where the Authority and the municipality agree to the use of a two-zone, appropriate
official plan designations and zoning must be put into place.
Within the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority the two-zone concept applies only to the
following communities and associated reaches of these watercourses:
Watercourse:
Spring Creek
Lamont Creek
Pretty River
Nottawasaga, Mad and Pine rivers
Community:
Community of Alliston
Community of Stayner
Town of Collingwood
Community of Angus
Special Policy Area
Where the one-zone or two-zone approaches have been demonstrated to be too stringent and
would likely cause significant social and economic hardships to the community, Special Policy
Areas (SPAs) may be considered. Special Policy Areas permit new development or
redevelopment in the flood fringe and floodway. Where a Special Policy Area is applied, the
municipality, conservation authority, and the province of Ontario (Ministry of Natural Resources
[MNR] and Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing [MMAH]) must agree to relax provincial
floodproofing and technical standards and accept a higher level of risk. Special Policy Area
application is generally limited to areas of historic development that qualify of the basis of
significance to the community and the severity of the potential flooding. Suitable policies and
standards must be incorporated into the municipality’s official plan and zoning by-law.
The Black Ash Creek within the Town of Collingwood was the only Special Policy Area within
the NVCA. It was established through the Town of Collingwood and province to accommodate
limited development within a shallow spill area of Black Ash Creek. Appropriate policies were
established in the Town’s Official Plan supporting the Special Policy Area requirements.
However, a channelization project for the Black Ash Creek within the Town of Collingwood that
deepened and widened the channel to accommodate the regional storm event was completed in
2005. As a result the flood plain Special Policy Area was removed.
Appendix 7 provides additional details on the two-zone and Special Policy Areas flood
management approaches.
Technical Standards for Flooding Hazards
Safe access
The ability for the public and emergency operations personnel (police, firefighters, ambulance
etc.) to safely access the floodplain during regulatory flood events is a paramount consideration
of any application for development within the riverine floodplain. Ingress and egress should be
"safe" pursuant to provincial floodproofing guidelines (MNR 2002a). Depths and velocities
should be such that pedestrian and vehicular emergency evacuations are possible.
38
Proposals must be reviewed to ensure access to the proposed development is safe and appropriate
for the proposed use. The provision of means by which people, vehicles and equipment can gain
access to and from the regulated feature for maintenance and/or construction of remedial works
must also be considered.
In the context of new development, the risks should be controlled by prohibiting development in
dangerous or inaccessible portions of the regulated feature.
For existing development, safety risks are a function of the occupancy of structures, the
susceptibility of the structure and the access routes to the structure. For existing development, the
following factors should be considered:
¾ The degree of risk with the use of the existing access;
¾ The ability to modify the existing access or construct a new safe access;
¾ The ability to find and use the access during an emergency; and
¾ The ability and willingness of the municipality (emergency vehicles) to use the access.
The risk can also be controlled by limiting the size (and therefore limiting the occupancy) of
additions or reconstruction projects. If the risk is determined to be too great, no
modifications/alterations/reconstructions of existing structures should be considered.
For minor additions and re-development on existing lots as a minimum, access should achieve
the maximum level of flood protection determined to be feasible and practical based on existing
infrastructure. In the absence of a site specific detailed analysis, it is recommended that the
depths for safe access not exceed 0.3 metres and velocities not exceed 1.7 metres/second.
Flood Proofing
Flood proofing includes alteration to the design of specific buildings, raising of ingress and
egress roadways and driveways, the construction of dykes, flood control channels, etc. The
variety of flood proofing options and requirements are too detailed and extensive to include in
these guidelines. For more information, please consult Appendix 6: “Flood proofing” of the
“Technical Guide – River and Stream Systems: Flooding Hazard limit” (MNR, 2002a).
Safety risks are a function of the occupancy of structures as well as the flood susceptibility of the
structures and the access routes to those structures. Risk should be controlled by limiting the size
and type (and thereby limiting the occupancy) of additions or reconstruction projects in
dangerous or inaccessible portions of the Regulatory floodplain. Flood proofing measures should
be in keeping with the standards of the River and Stream Systems Flooding Hazard Limit,
Technical Guide – Appendix 6, (MNR 2002a).
Where flood proofing standards or safe access cannot be obtained for development,
generally the development should be prohibited.
As part of the review of an application, the NVCA may request an Environmental Impact Study
(EIS) to address development within a flooding hazard. An EIS is a mechanism for assessing
impacts to determine the suitability of a proposal. The submission of an EIS does not guarantee
approval of the works. An EIS must be carried out by a qualified professional, with recognized
39
expertise in the appropriate area of concern and shall be prepared using established procedures
and recognized methodologies to the satisfaction of the Authority. Appendix 6 provides
additional details on what the scope of an EIS may contain.
Regulation Allowances
River or stream valley allowances allow the NVCA to regulate development adjacent to erosion
and flooding hazards in a manner that provides protection against unforeseen or predicted
external conditions that could have an adverse effect on the natural conditions or processes of the
river or stream valley. The NVCA’s regulation provides for an allowance of 15 metres.
Allowances give the Authority the opportunity to protect access to and along a valley and/or
floodplain. This access may be required for emergency purposes, regular maintenance to
existing structures or to repair failed structures.
Development within the allowance must be regulated to ensure that existing erosion and flooding
hazards are not aggravated, that new hazards are not created, and to ensure that pollution and the
conservation of land will not be affected. The allowance provides the conservation authority with
the ability to maintain and enhance the natural features and ecological functions of the river or
stream valley.
Regulation of development in the allowance is also required to deal with issues related to
accuracy of the modeling and analysis tools utilized to establish the limits of the erosion and
flooding hazards.
To provide access and protection against unforeseen conditions, provincial guidelines
recommend that development should generally be setback a minimum of 6 metres adjacent to
erosion and flooding hazards (Sections 3.0 and 3.4, Erosion Access Allowance, Technical Guide
– River and Stream Systems: Erosion Hazard Limit, MNR, 2002b).
MNR recommends that this setback not only be applied to the erosion hazards discussed in the
sections above but also adjacent to the flooding hazard because of the potential for erosion
throughout the flooding hazard as a result of the flow of water during significant runoff events.
For those situations where additional study is warranted to determine the development setback
required providing the required public safety and access, a study should be undertaken using
accepted scientific, geotechnical and engineering principles.
Protection of public safety and access however may not be sufficient to provide for all of the
above noted requirements or purposes for the allowances. Additional technical studies by
qualified professionals may be required to establish the appropriate extent and location of
development within the allowance. A reduced development setback may be appropriate where
the existing development already encroaches within the 15 metre setback and further
development will not aggravate the erosion or flooding hazard.
4.3.4 Implementation Guidelines for River and Stream Valleys
The following sections outline the guidelines for implementing the NVCA Regulation with
respect to river and stream valleys and the associated allowances. The Authority, in its role
through the planning process, will also review planning applications to ensure that in general all
40
development can occur and be setback an appropriate distance from the river and stream valley
hazards.
4.3.4.1 Development within the Erosion Hazard of an Apparent (Confined)
River or Stream Valley
The following policies are focused on the physical feature and erosion hazard associated with
apparent river or stream valleys.
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
In general, development shall not be permitted within the erosion hazard of an apparent
river or stream valley;
In general, stabilization works within the erosion hazard of an apparent river or stream
valley to allow for future/proposed development or an increase in development envelope
or area shall not be permitted;
In general, development within the erosion hazard of an apparent river or stream valley
on vacant lots of record shall not be permitted;
In general, stormwater management facilities within the erosion hazard of an apparent
river or stream valley shall not be permitted;
Further to Section 4.3.4.1.1), development shall be prohibited within the erosion hazard
of an apparent river or stream valley where the use is:
a)
an institutional use associated with hospitals, nursing homes, preschool, school
as a result of erosion and/or failure of protection works/measures, or
b)
an essential emergency service such as that provided by fire, police and
ambulance stations and electrical substations which would be impaired during an
emergency as result of erosion, or any other hazard associated with erosion
and/or as a result of failure of protection works/measures, or
c)
uses associated with the disposal, manufacture, treatment or storage of hazardous
substances;
Notwithstanding Section 4.3.4.1.1), public infrastructure (e.g. roads, sewers, flood and
erosion control works) and various utilities (e.g. pipelines) may be permitted within the
erosion hazard of an apparent river or stream valley subject to the activity being approved
through a satisfactory Environmental Assessment process and/or if it has been
demonstrated to the satisfaction of the conservation authority that the control of flooding,
erosion, pollution, or the conservation of land will not be affected;
Notwithstanding Section 4.3.4.1.1), development associated with public parks (e.g.
passive or low intensity outdoor recreation and education, trail systems) may be
permitted within the erosion hazard of an apparent river or stream valley if it has been
Notwithstanding Section 4.3.4.1.1), stream bank, slope and valley stabilization to protect
existing development and conservation or restoration projects may be permitted within
the erosion hazard of an apparent river or stream valley subject to the activity being
approved through a satisfactory Environmental Assessment process and/or if it has been
41
9)
10)
11)
Notwithstanding Section 4.3.4.1.1) and 4.3.4.1.3), minor removal and placement of fill
and site grading within the erosion hazard of an apparent river or stream valley may be
permitted if it has been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the conservation authority that
the control of flooding, erosion, pollution, or the conservation of land will not be
affected;
Notwithstanding Section 4.3.4.1.1), development associated with the construction of a
driveway or access way through the erosion hazard of apparent river or stream valley in
order to provide access to lands outside of the apparent river or stream valley may be
affected. The submitted plans should demonstrate that:
a)
there is no viable alternative outside the regulated area; and
b)
the requirements for the provision of safe access have been met.
Notwithstanding Section 4.3.4.1.1), development associated with existing uses located
within the erosion hazard of an apparent river or stream valley such as minor additions,
non-habitable accessory buildings, pools, landscaping retaining walls, grading, decks,
etc., may be permitted if it has been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the conservation
authority that the control of flooding, erosion, pollution, or the conservation of land will
not be affected. The submitted plans should demonstrate that:
a)
12)
there is no feasible alternative site outside of the apparent river or stream valley or
in the event that there is no feasible alternative site, that the proposed
development is located in an area of least (and acceptable) risk;
b)
no development is located on an unstable slope5 except for those works that by
their nature must be located on an unstable slope such as slope stabilization works
c)
there is no impact on existing and future slope stability;
d)
bank stabilization or erosion protection works are not required;
e)
development will have no negative impacts on natural stream meandering/fluvial
processes;
f)
structural development would not be susceptible to stream erosion;
g)
development will not prevent access into and through the valley in order to
undertake preventative actions/maintenance or during an emergency;
h)
the potential for surficial erosion has been addressed through the submission of
proper drainage, erosion and sediment control and site stabilization/restoration
plans; and
i)
natural features and/or ecological functions contributing to the
conservation of land are protected, pollution is prevented and flooding
hazards have been adequately addressed.
Notwithstanding 4.3.4.1.1), development may be permitted for the reconstruction or
relocation of a building within the erosion hazard of an apparent river or stream valley
provided that it has not been damaged or destroyed by erosion and if it has been
5
For this document, the four main classes of slope movement; translational or surficial sliding, rotational
failures, retrogressive failures, and flow slides or earth flows. Refer to Section 2.4.5.1 of MNR’s Technical
Guide - River and Stream Systems: Erosion Hazard Limit (2002) for additional information.
42
13)
14)
erosion, pollution or conservation of land will not be affected. The submitted plans
should demonstrate that the building:
a)
cannot be relocated to an area outside the erosion hazard and if there is no feasible
alternative site, that it is located in an area of least (and acceptable) risk;
b)
will be protected from the erosion hazard through incorporation of appropriate
building design parameters; and
c)
will not exceed original habitable floor area nor the original footprint of the
previous structure.
Notwithstanding Section 4.3.4.1.1), where technical assessment or studies demonstrate
that lands within the erosion hazard of an apparent river or stream valley are not subject
to an erosion or flooding hazard, development may be permitted if it has been
erosion, pollution or the conservation of land will not be affected. The submitted plans
should demonstrate that:
a)
no access through the erosion susceptible area is required;
b)
development will not prevent access into and through the valley in order to
c)
plans;
d)
there is no impact on existing and future slope stability;
e)
bank stabilization or erosion protection works are not required; and
f)
natural features and/or ecological functions contributing to the conservation of
land are protected, pollution is prevented and flooding hazards have been
adequately addressed.
Notwithstanding Section 4.3.4.1.1), the replacement of sewage disposal systems may be
permitted within the erosion hazard of an apparent river or stream valley if it has been
erosion, pollution or the conservation of land will not be affected. The replacement
system should be located outside of the erosion hazard where possible, and only
permitted within the erosion hazard subject to being located in the area of lowest risk.
4.3.4.2
1)
Development within the Allowance Adjacent to the Erosion
Hazard of an Apparent (Confined) River or Stream Valley
Development may be permitted within the allowance adjacent to the erosion hazard of an
apparent river or stream valley if it has been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the
conservation authority that the control of flooding, erosion, pollution or the conservation
of land will not be affected. The submitted plans should demonstrate that:
a)
b)
c)
d)
development does not create or aggravate an erosion hazard;
development is set back a sufficient distance from the stable top of bank to avoid
increases in loading forces on the top of the slope;
development does not change drainage or vegetation patterns that would
compromise slope stability or exacerbate erosion of the slope face;
development does not prevent access to and along the top of the valley slope;
43
e)
f)
the potential for surficial erosion has been addressed through proper drainage,
erosion and sediment control and site stabilization/restoration plans; and
adequately addressed;
4.3.4.3
Development within the Erosion Hazard of a Not Apparent
(Unconfined) River or Stream Valley (Meander Belt)
The following policies are focused on the erosion hazards associated with not apparent valleys.
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
In general, development within the meander belt of a not apparent river or stream valley
shall not be permitted;
In general, stabilization works within the meander belt of a not apparent river or stream
valley to allow for future/proposed development or an increase in development envelope
or area shall not be permitted;
In general, stormwater management facilities within the meander belt of a not apparent
river or stream valley shall not be permitted:
In general, development within the meander belt of a not apparent river or stream valley
on vacant lots of record shall not be permitted;
Further to Section 4.3.4.3.1), development shall be prohibited in the meander belt of a not
apparent river or stream valley where the use is:
a)
b)
emergency as result of erosion, or any other hazard associated with erosion
and/or failure of protection works/measures, or
c)
substances;
meander belt of a not apparent river or stream valley subject to the activity being
permitted within the meander belt of a not apparent river or stream valley if it has been
Notwithstanding Section 4.3.4.3.1), stream bank stabilization to protect existing
development and conservation or restoration projects may be permitted within the
meander belt of a not apparent river or stream valley subject to the activity being
44
9)
10)
11)
12)
Notwithstanding Section 4.3.4.3.1), minor placement or removal of fill and site grading
within the meander belt of a not apparent river or stream valley may be permitted if it has
been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the conservation authority that the control of
flooding, erosion, pollution, or the conservation of land will not be affected;
driveway or access way through the meander belt of a not apparent river or stream valley
in order to provide access to lands outside of the erosion hazard may be permitted subject
to the provisions of safe access and if it has been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the
conservation authority that there is no viable alternative outside of the regulated area and
that the control of flooding, erosion, pollution, or the conservation of land will not be
affected.
within the meander belt of a not apparent river or stream valley such as minor additions,
non-habitable accessory buildings, pools, landscaping retaining walls, grading, decks,
etc., may be permitted if it has been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the conservation
authority that the control of flooding, erosion, pollution, or the conservation of land will
a)
there is no feasible alternative site outside of the meander belt of a not apparent
river or stream valley or in the event that there is no feasible alternative site, that
the proposed development is located in an area of least (and acceptable) risk;
b)
development will not prevent access into and through the meander belt in order to
c)
development will have no negative impacts on natural stream meandering/ fluvial
processes;
d)
plans; and
e)
f)
non-habitable structural development would not be susceptible to erosion
h)
minor additions would not be susceptible to stream erosion within the 100 year
planning horizon
relocation of a building within the meander belt of a not apparent river or stream valley,
provided that it has not been damaged or destroyed by erosion and if it has been
erosion, pollution or conservation of land will not be affected. The submitted plans
should demonstrate that the building:
a)
alternative site, that it is located in an area of least (and acceptable) risk; and
b)
45
c)
will not exceed original habitable floor area nor the original footprint area of the
previous structure.
4.3.4.4
1)
Development within the Allowance Adjacent to the Erosion
Hazard of a Not Apparent (Unconfined) River or Stream
Valley (Meander Belt)
Development may be permitted within the allowance adjacent to the meander belt if it has
flooding, erosion, pollution or the conservation of land will not be affected. The
submitted plans should demonstrate that:
a)
development does not create or aggravate the erosion hazard;
b)
development does not prevent access to and along the meander belt;
c)
erosion and sediment control and site stabilization/restoration plans;
d)
4.3.4.5
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
Development Within One-Zone Regulatory Floodplain of River
or Stream Valley
In general, development within the Regulatory floodplain shall not be permitted;
In general, flood hazard protection and bank stabilization works to allow for
future/proposed development or an increase in development envelope or area within the
Regulatory floodplain shall not be permitted;
In general, development associated with new and/or the expansion of existing trailer
parks/campgrounds in the Regulatory floodplain shall not be permitted;
In general, stormwater management facilities within the 100 year floodplain shall not be
permitted;
In general, development within the Regulatory floodplain on vacant lots of record shall
not be permitted;
In general, basements within the Regulatory floodplain shall not be permitted;
In general, underground parking within the Regulatory floodplain shall not be permitted;
Further to Section 4.3.4.5.1), development shall be prohibited within the Regulatory
floodplain where the use is:
a)
as a result of flooding and/or failure of flood proofing measures or protection
works; or
b)
emergency as result of flooding, the failure of flood proofing measures and/or
protection works; or
c)
substances.
46
9)
10)
11)
12)
13)
Regulatory floodplain subject to the activity being approved through a satisfactory
Environmental Assessment process and/or if it has been demonstrated to the satisfaction
of the conservation authority that the control of flooding, erosion, pollution, or the
conservation of land will not be affected;
permitted within the Regulatory floodplain if it has been demonstrated to the satisfaction
of the conservation authority that the control of flooding, erosion, pollution, or the
Notwithstanding Section 4.3.4.5.1), stream, bank, slope, and valley stabilization to
protect existing development and conservation or restoration projects may be permitted
within the Regulatory floodplain subject to the activity being approved through a
satisfactory Environmental Assessment process and/or if it has been demonstrated to the
satisfaction of the conservation authority that the control of flooding, erosion, pollution,
or the conservation of land will not be affected;
within the Regulatory floodplain such as minor additions, non-habitable detached
accessory buildings, pools, landscaping retaining walls, grading, decks, etc., may be
affected. The submitted plans should demonstrate that:
a)
there is no feasible alternative site outside of the Regulatory floodplain for the
proposed development or in the event that there is no feasible alternative site, that
b)
the proposed works do not create new hazards or aggravate flooding on adjacent
or other properties and there are no negative upstream and downstream hydraulic
impacts;
c)
the development is protected from the flood hazard in accordance with established
flood proofing and protection techniques;
d)
the proposed development will not prevent access for emergency works,
maintenance, and evacuation;
e)
plans;
f)
natural features and/or ecological functions associated with conservation of land
are protected, pollution is prevented and erosion hazards have been adequately
addressed ;
Notwithstanding Section 4.3.4.5.1), development may be permitted for the reconstruction
or relocation of a building within the Regulatory floodplain, provided that it has not been
damaged or destroyed by flooding and if it has been demonstrated to the satisfaction of
the conservation authority that the control of flooding, erosion, pollution, or conservation
of land will not be affected. The submitted plans should demonstrate that the building:
a)
cannot be relocated to an area outside the flood hazard and if there is no feasible
47
b)
14)
15)
16)
17)
will be protected from the flood hazard through incorporation of appropriate
c)
will not exceed original habitable floor area of the previous structure nor the
original footprint area of the previous structure.
driveway or access way through the Regulatory floodplain in order to provide access to
lands outside of the Regulatory floodplain may be permitted subject to the provision of
safe access and if it has been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the conservation
authority that there is no viable alternative outside of the regulated area and that the
control of flooding, erosion, pollution, or the conservation of land will not be affected;
Notwithstanding Section 4.3.4.5.1), minor removal or placement of fill and site grading
may be permitted within the Regulatory floodplain if it has been demonstrated to the
satisfaction of the conservation authority that the control of flooding, erosion, pollution or
the conservation of land will not be affected;
permitted within the Regulatory floodplain if it has been demonstrated to the satisfaction
of the conservation authority that the control of flooding, erosion, pollution or the
conservation of land will not be affected. The replacement system should be located
outside of the floodplain where possible, and only permitted within the floodplain subject
to being located in the area of lowest risk.
Notwithstanding Section 4.3.4.5.1), above ground parking lots may be permitted within
the Regulatory floodplain if it has been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the
of land will not be affected, and that safe pedestrian and vehicular access is achieved.
4.3.4.6
1)
Development Within the Allowance of the Regulatory Floodplain of
River or Stream Valley
Development may be permitted within the allowance of a Regulatory floodplain if it has
flooding, erosion, pollution or the conservation of land will not be affected. The
submitted plans should demonstrate that:
a)
development does not aggravate the flood hazard or create a new one;
b)
development does not impede access for emergency works, maintenance and
evacuation;
c)
erosion and sediment control and site stabilization/ restoration plans; and
d)
the natural features and/or ecological functions associated with conservation of
land are protected, pollution is prevented and erosion hazards have been
4.4
Great Lakes Shorelines
The following section indicates how the extent of Great Lakes shoreline is determined for the
purpose of administering the Regulation. The NVCA’s Regulation contains the following
sections dealing with Great Lakes shorelines.
48
“Development prohibited
2. (1) Subject to section 3, no person shall undertake development or permit
another person to undertake development in or on areas within the
jurisdiction of the conservation authority that are:
(a)
adjacent or close to the shoreline of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence
River system or to inland lakes that may be affected by flooding,
erosion or dynamic beaches, including the area from the furthest
offshore extent of the NVCA’s boundary to the furthest landward
extent of the aggregate of the following distances:
i) the 100-year flood level, plus the appropriate allowance for
wave uprush,
ii) the predicted long-term stable slope projected from the
existing stable toe of the slope or from the predicted
location of the toe of the slope as that location may have
shifted as a result of shoreline erosion over a 100-year
period,
iii) where a dynamic beach is associated with the waterfront
lands, a 30 metre allowance inland to accommodate
dynamic beach movement,
iv) 15 metres inland;”
“Permission to develop
3.(1)
The Authority may grant permission for development in or on the areas
described in subsection 2(1) if, in its opinion, the control of flooding,
erosion, dynamic beaches, pollution or the conservation of land will not be
affected by the development.
(2)
The permission of the Authority shall be given in writing, with or without
conditions.”
4.4.2 Discussion of Shorelines
Shorelines are comprised of three components: 1) flooding hazards, 2) erosion hazards, and
3) dynamic beach hazards.
4.4.2.1 Processes and Functions Along Shorelines
In general, flooding is a phenomenon influenced by and sensitive to water level fluctuations.
Inundation of low-lying Great Lakes –St. Lawrence River system shorelines in and of itself does
not necessarily constitute a significant hazard. The hazard is dependant on the type, design,
location and density of any development in or near the flood inundated shorelines. However,
where flooded lands are coupled with storm events, the cumulative impact can and frequently
does pose significant degrees of risk. Of importance in managing a potential flood-susceptible
49
shoreline is the need to understand the interrelationship between pre-storm flooding, storm setup,
wave height, wave uprush and other water related hazards (i.e., wave spray, ice). If the area of
inundation is a wetland or an undeveloped area, the resultant “damage” caused by a storm event
may be minimal if measured in terms of human losses (i.e., property and life). Indeed, periodic
flooding of wetland complexes has been found to be beneficial for the continued maintenance
and enhanced diversity of wetland vegetation itself, by helping to eliminate the invasion of water
sensitive upland vegetation into low-lying shorelines during periods of low water levels. In
terms of human use and occupation of the low-lying Great Lakes – St. Lawrence River system
shorelines, development decisions based on or during periods of low water levels can present the
most serious problem. During lower water levels, the potential flood hazard to homes, cottages
and other development often goes unrecognized. Consequently, when water levels return to
long-term averages or high water levels, flood damages are sustained. These damages are
frequently quite significant (MNR1996b).
Erosion within the Great Lakes – St. Lawrence River system is a concern, particularly within the
lower Great Lakes. Erosion rates are dependent upon a number of lake and land processes as
well as the composition and morphology of the shore. In general terms, identification of erosion
susceptible shorelines is rather simple in that erosion of bedrock and cohesive shores involves a
unidirectional process. In the absence of human intervention and/or the installation of
remediation measures, once material is removed, dislodged or extracted from the shore face and
near shore profile it cannot reconstitute with the original material and is essentially lost forever.
Even with the installation of remedial measures (i.e., assumed to address the erosion hazard), the
natural forces of erosion, storm action/attack and other naturally occurring water and erosion
related forces may prove to be such that the remedial measures may only offer a limited measure
of protection and may only reduce or address the erosion hazard over a temporary period of time.
Given the naturally complex and dynamic nature of the beach environment, determining hazard
susceptibility of a given beach formation requires careful assessment of a wide range of
parameters. Over the short term, beach environments, impacted by flood and erosion processes,
may undergo alternating periods of erosion and accretion as they attempt to achieve a dynamic
equilibrium with the forces acting upon them. Over the long term, beaches experiencing a
positive sediment budget (i.e., more sand and gravel is incoming than outgoing) are generally in
fact accreting shore forms while those experiencing a negative sediment budget are eroding. As
such, the depiction and evaluation of the hazard susceptibility of dynamic beaches should be
dependent on the level of information, knowledge and understanding of the beach sediment
budget and the cross-profile width over which most of the dynamic profile changes are taking
place.
4.4.2.2 Shoreline Flood Hazard
The variable nature of water elevations of the Great Lakes is apparent from historical records.
Of the two key factors influencing long-term and short-term changes in lake levels, natural
phenomena (i.e., rainfall, evaporation, wind, storms, etc.) by far, cause the greater magnitudes of
changes, than does human intervention (i.e., diversions, water control structures, etc.).
The most familiar changes in lake levels are seasonal fluctuations as evidenced by average
differences of about 0.6 to 1.1 metres in lake levels between the summer and winter months.
50
Superimposed on these seasonal fluctuations are some extremely short periods of significantly
larger magnitudes of lake level changes. The most temporary of these are caused by storm winds
which blow over the lake surfaces pushing the water to the opposite side or end of the lake.
These “wind setups” or “storm surges” have frequently caused total differences of more than 4
metres and occasionally as high as 5 metres in lake levels at opposite ends of some of the Great
Lakes.
The shoreline refers to the furthest landward limit bordering a large body of water. Factors to be
addressed in the areas susceptible to flooding along the shoreline include: the 100-year flood
level; and flood allowance for wave uprush and/or other water related hazards (Figure 10).
The 100-year flood level is the water level due to the combined occurrences of mean monthly
lake levels and wind set up having a 1% chance of occurring during any year.
The 100-year wave uprush level is based on mean monthly lake levels, wind setup and wind
generated waves.
Figure 10: Lake Flooding
In areas susceptible to wave action, shoreline flood hazards extend landward beyond the 100year flood level to the limit of wave action. All shorelines should be considered susceptible to
wave action unless site specific studies using accepted engineering principles demonstrate that
wave action is not significant.
Wave action includes wave uprush, wind setup, wave overtopping and/or wave spray. Wind
setup is the mean increase in the water level caused by the onshore transport of water due to
waves breaking at the shoreline, while wave uprush is the distance that the water will run-up on
the shoreline. For straight, uniform shoreline reaches without protection works, the landward
limit of wave action can be represented by the maximum sum of wave setup and wave uprush.
In areas where waves act on shore protection works and other structures, and in areas with
irregular shorelines, the wave action may include wave overtopping and wave spray which are
more difficult to determine and may require detailed study.
Shoreline flood hazards include, but are not limited to:
¾ wave overtopping
¾ wave spray
51
¾ ice piling
¾ ice jamming, and
¾ ship generated waves
Wave overtopping essentially occurs when the height of the natural shoreline, or of the
protection work, above the still water level is less than the limit of the wave uprush. As a result,
wave overtopping the shoreline or protection work can cause flooding of the onshore area and
can threaten the structural stability of protection works.
Wave spray has been observed passing over structures (houses) and well past them. The
landward extent and quantity of wave spray depends on such factors as the structure of the shore
and nearshore, type of protection works, size of incident waves and wind conditions. Generally,
during storms a significant amount of wave spray will occur behind structures that are near
vertical and subjected to large breaking waves.
All shoreline areas and connecting channels form an ice cover. There are two types of ice which
impact shoreline features: drift ice (slush, frazil, pancake, flow and composite ice) and shorefast
ice (anchor ice). The impact on the shoreline by drift ice is dependent on the physical orientation
and composition of the shoreline, wave action, wind setup and duration of ice action as the ice is
transported alongshore and thrown onshore and then drawn offshore by wave action. Anchor or
shorefast ice action on a shoreline has a horizontal and vertical impact on shoreline features as
the stationary ice grows or diminishes in response to the temperature fluctuations over the winter
period.
Ice piling results from wind blowing over the ice, pushing the ice landward. This can produce
ridging and a large build–up of ice at the shore. This shore ice can then scour sections of the
beach and nearshore as well as destroy structures close to the shore. The moving ice can also
remove boulders from the shallow areas, thereby reducing the level of shore protection provided
by the boulders.
Ice jamming, the build-up of ice at the outlets of the lakes into the connecting channels, can
cause extensive damage to shore structures and nearshore profiles. At the same time, ice jams
frequently pose problems by impeding water flows outletting from the lakes and into the
connecting channels causing varying magnitudes in lake level increases depending on the size
and duration of the ice jam blockage.
Depending on the shoreline configuration and slope characteristics, ship generated waves can
rush up the shoreline past the 100-year flood level. In addition to ship generated wave uprush,
the subsequent ship generated wave drawdown can scour and damage a shoreline or protection
work.
High points of land not subject to flooding but surrounded by the shoreline flood hazard or
“flooded land” are considered to be within the flood hazard and part of the shoreline flood
hazard.
52
4.4.2.3
Shoreline Erosion Hazard
Many geological, topographical and meteorological factors determine the erodibility of a
shoreline. These include soil type, surface and groundwater, bluff height, vegetation cover,
shoreline orientation, shoreline processes, wind and wave climate and lake level fluctuations.
Erosion over the long-term is a continuous process influenced by these lakeside (i.e. wave action,
water levels) and landside factors (i.e., surface/subsurface drainage, loading/weight of buildings,
removal of surface vegetation).
The rate of erosion may be heightened during severe storm events, resulting in large losses of
land over a very short period of time. These large losses, which are more readily visible
immediately following major storm events, at times can obscure the more continuing long-term
processes.
The risk of erosion is managed by planning for the 100-year erosion rate (the average annual rate
of recession extended over a one hundred year time span). The extent of the shoreline erosion
hazard limit depends on the shoreline type: bluff or beach.
The shoreline erosion hazard limit includes the following (Figure 11):
¾ stable toe of slope (as may be shifted as a result of erosion over a 100 year
period),
¾ predicted long-term stable slope projected from the stable toe of slope, and
¾ an allowance inland of 15 metres on large inland lakes or 30 metres on the Great
Lakes.
Figure 11: Lake Erosion
To slow the erosion of shorelines, structures such as breakwaters, seawalls and revetments have
been used. Technical Guidelines- Great Lakes –St. Lawrence River Shorelines- Part 7 –
Addressing the Hazard (MNR 1996b) provide guidance for considering how such structures may
be considered to modify the shoreline erosion hazard.
Specifically a protection works standard - erosion hazard is provided to illustrate how shoreline
erosion prevention structures should be evaluated.
However, even with the installation of remedial measures (i.e., assumed to address the erosion
hazard), the natural forces of erosion, storm action/attack and other naturally occurring water and
erosion related forces may prove to be such that the remedial measures may only offer a limited
53
measure of protection and may only reduce or address the erosion hazard over a temporary
period of time. Even if the shoreline is successfully armoured, the near shore lake bottom
continues to erode or down cut eventually on all shorelines. This process is more active typically
on cohesive shorelines. Eventually the lakebed down cutting will undermine the shoreline
armouring causing the structure present to ultimately fail (Figure 12). The failure and ultimate
property loss may extend back to the point at which the natural shoreline occurs. The natural
shoreline position is typically not the present waterline or break wall interface, but actually some
point inland from the armoured shoreline position.
Figure 12: Lake Erosion Down Cutting, see also Technical Guidelines - Great Lakes - St.
Lawrence River (MNR 1996b).
These problems usually occur on updrift and/or downdrift properties, aggravating existing offsite hazards, and/or posing unacceptable detrimental impacts on a wide array of environmental
components of the shoreline ecosystem (e.g., fisheries, wetlands, water quality). The natural
movement of the shoreline due to erosion can be aggravated by these human activities and the
impact of the activity can be transferred some distance from the impact site.
Therefore, it is recommended as a general principle, that measures which harden the shoreline be
avoided. Further, it is recommended that Shoreline Management Plans be undertaken to assist in
development of shoreline specific policies and, specifically to evaluate whether the
implementation of erosion protection structures (revetments, seawalls etc.) are appropriate in the
context of the overall shoreline processes (MNR, 1987).
4.4.2.4
Dynamic Beach Hazard
To define a dynamic beach, the flooding hazard limit must be known. The flooding hazard limit
combines the 100-year flood elevation plus wave uprush. In dynamic beach areas, elevations can
change quite dramatically from season to season and year to year due to build up and erosion of
sand, cobbles and other beach deposits. A dynamic beach is considered an unstable accumulation
of shoreline sediments generally along the Great Lakes – St. Lawrence River system and large
inland lakes. In dynamic beach areas, topographic elevations can change quite rapidly due to the
accumulation or loss of beach materials through the effects of wind and wave action. These
changes can occur seasonally or yearly and, at times, quite rapidly and dramatically.
54
To determine the limit of a dynamic beach, the flooding hazard must be established. The
flooding hazard is defined as the aggregate of the 100-year lake level plus a landward allowance
to accommodate wave uprush and other water related hazards.
It is important that the 100-year lake level be established as a historic location rather than as an
elevation.
If considered as an elevation the location of the 100-year lake level will move with the accretion
or loss of beach materials. For example, during a period of low lake levels, it is expected that the
accretion of beach materials would occur. If established as an elevation, the 100-year lake level
(and the subsequent flood hazard) would move lakeward. Under this approach the Regulation
Limit could be construed as also moving lakeward. This area of accretion could rapidly be lost
during a storm or when lake levels return to normal. Development permitted under this standard
would be at risk.
Historic information about the location of the farthest landward extent of the 100-year lake level
will be an important consideration for the long term management of dynamic beach hazards. The
1988 mapping created under the Flood Damage Reduction Program is an example which
provides a historic location of the 100 year lake level for Lake Huron.
When topographic elevations change, so does the location of the flooding hazard limit. This is
an especially important consideration, because in times of low lake levels (as has recently been
the case on the Great Lakes), the near shore areas that have been submerged under normal or
high lake levels are now exposed, subjected to accretion and erosion processes. It may seem that
the landward extent of the dynamic beach has changed, thereby introducing potential for
development or expansion of existing development. Historic information about the farthest
landward extent of flooding will be an important consideration for good long-term management
of dynamic beach hazards. The balance of various coastal processes, which allows for the state
of dynamic equilibrium for these beach areas, only exists in the natural environment. Human
intrusion within these areas can significantly and negatively impact on the form and function of
the dynamic beach. Development should only be considered in limited defined areas outside of
the dynamic beach hazard, following the appropriate level of scientific investigation and
assessment.
The dynamic beach hazard is applied to all shorelines of the Great Lakes – St. Lawrence River
system where there is an accumulation of surficial sediment landward of the stillwater line
(defined at the time of mapping under non-storm conditions), such that action by waves and
other water and wind-related processes can lead to erosion of the sediments and a resultant
landward translation of the shore profile.
The dynamic beach hazard is only applied where:
¾ beach or dune deposits exist landward of the water line (e.g., land/water interface),
¾ beach or dune deposits overlying bedrock or cohesive material are equal to or greater
than 0.3 metres in thickness, 10 metres in width and 100 metres in length along the
shoreline, and
55
¾ where the maximum fetch distance measured over an arc extending 60 degrees on either
side of a line perpendicular to the shoreline is greater than 5 km (this normally does not
occur where beach or dune deposits are located in embayments, along connecting
channels and in other areas of restricted wave action where wave related processes are
too slight to alter the beach profile landward of the waterline).
The criteria used to define and classify a section of shoreline as a dynamic beach are intended to
be applied over a stretch of shoreline on the order of 100 metres or more in length. Where
shorter sections of sediments occur on a rocky or cohesive shoreline they are likely to be
transitory. Beach width and thickness should be evaluated under calm conditions and at water
levels between datum (IGDL) and the average annual low water level. When lake level
conditions are higher, consideration should be given to the submerged portion of the beach. If
possible, mapping should not take place during high lake level conditions. It is expected that the
person carrying out the mapping will exercise judgment, based on knowledge of the local area
and historical evidence, in those areas where the beach width is close to the suggested criteria for
defining a dynamic beach.
Some dynamic beaches have been identified by the Ministry of Natural Resources and should be
confirmed through a shoreline management plan (MNR, 1987).
The Dynamic Beach Hazard includes the following (Figure 13):
100-year flood level,
an allowance for wave uprush, and if necessary, an allowance for other water
related hazards, including ship generated waves, ice piling and ice jamming,
an allowance inland of 30 metres to accommodate for dynamic beach
movement on the Great Lakes.
Figure 13: Dynamic Beach
To assist in addressing dynamic beach issues, the Town of Wasaga Beach in partnership with the
NVCA, has prepared a discussion paper examining beach and dune conservation and protection.
The discussion paper is located on the town’s website under Natural Heritage Studies at the
following link:
http://www.wasagabeach.com/studies.index.gk
56
4.4.2.5
Regulation Allowances
The allowances adjacent to shoreline flood, erosion and dynamic beach hazards allow the NVCA
to regulate development in these areas in a manner that:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Provides protection against unforeseen or predicted external conditions that could
have an adverse effect on the natural conditions or processes of the shoreline;
Protects access to and along the shoreline hazard areas. Access may be required for
emergency purposes, regular maintenance to existing structures or to repair failed
structures;
Ensures that existing erosion, flooding and dynamic beach hazards are not aggravated
and that new hazards are not created;
Ensures that the control of pollution and the conservation of land will not be affected;
Maintains and enhances the natural features and ecological functions of shorelines;
and
Addresses issues related to accuracy of the modeling and analysis tools utilized to
establish the limits of the flooding, erosion and dynamic beach hazards
The NVCA’s Regulation states that the dynamic ceach allowance is 30 metres and the
allowance is 15 metres as illustrated above.
4.4.3 Implementation Guidelines for Great Lakes Shorelines
The following sections outline the guidelines for implementing the NVCA’s Regulation with
respect to Great Lakes shorelines and the associated allowances. The NVCA, in its role through
the planning process, will review planning applications to ensure that in general all development
will be setback an appropriate distance from the shoreline hazards.
The NVCA’s area of jurisdiction does not contain any large inland lakes which have a surface
area equal to or greater than 100 square kilometres. As a result, the lakes within the Authority
will be treated in a manner similar to a river or stream valleys.
4.4.3.1 Development Within the Shoreline Flood Hazard
For the purposes of the following policies, the shoreline flood hazard is the limit of the landward
extent of flooding accounting for the 1:100 year flood elevation, plus an allowance for wave
uprush and other water related hazards.
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
In general, development within the shoreline flood hazard shall not be permitted;
In general, flood hazard protection and bank stabilization works to allow for
future/proposed development or an increase in development envelope or area within the
shoreline flood hazard shall not be permitted;
In general, development associated with new and/or the expansion of existing trailer
parks/campgrounds in the shoreline flood hazard shall not be permitted;
In general, stormwater management facilities within the shoreline flood hazard shall not
be permitted;
In general, development within the shoreline flood hazard on vacant lots of record shall
not be permitted;
57
6)
7)
8)
9)
10)
11)
12)
In general, basements within the shoreline flood hazard shall not be permitted;
In general, underground parking within the shoreline flood hazard shall not be permitted;
Further to Section 4.4.3.1.1), development shall be prohibited in the shoreline flood
hazard where the use is:
a)
as a result of flooding and/or failure of flood proofing measures or protection
works, or
b)
emergency as result of erosion, the failure of flood proofing measures and/or
protection works, or
c)
substances;
shoreline flood hazard subject to the activity being approved through a satisfactory
of the conservation authority that the control of flooding, erosion, pollution, dynamic
beaches or the conservation of land will not be affected;
permitted within the shoreline flood hazard if it has been demonstrated to the satisfaction
Notwithstanding Section 4.4.3.1.1), shoreline, bank, and slope stabilization to protect
the shoreline flood hazard subject to the activity being approved through a satisfactory
within the shoreline flood hazard such as minor additions, non-habitable accessory
buildings (e.g. boat house), pools, landscaping retaining walls, grading, non-enclosed
decks, etc., may be permitted if it has been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the
conservation authority that the control of flooding, erosion, pollution, dynamic beaches
or the conservation of land will not be affected. The submitted plans should demonstrate
that:
a)
there is no feasible alternative site outside of the shoreline flood hazard for the
proposed development or in the event that there is no feasible alternative site, that
b)
the proposed works do not create new or aggravate flooding on the subject,
adjacent or other properties;
c)
development is protected from the shoreline flood hazard in accordance with
established flood proofing and protection techniques;
58
d)
13)
14)
15)
16)
17)
1)
proposed development will not prevent access for emergency works,
maintenance, and evacuation;
e)
potential for surficial erosion has been addressed through the submission of
plans;
f)
natural features and/or ecological functions associated with conservation of land
are protected, pollution is prevented and erosion and dynamic beach hazards have
been adequately addressed;
Notwithstanding Section 4.4.3.1.1), development may be permitted for the reconstruction
or relocation of a building within the shoreline flood hazard, provided that it has not been
damaged or destroyed by flooding or other water related hazards and if it has been
erosion, pollution or dynamic beaches or conservation of land will not be affected. The
submitted plans should demonstrate that the building:
a)
cannot be relocated to an area outside the flood hazard and if there is no feasible
b)
will be protected from the flood hazard; and
c)
will not exceed original habitable floor area nor the original footprint area of the
previous structure.
driveway or access way through the shoreline flood hazard in order to provide access to
lands outside of the flood hazard may be permitted subject to the provision of safe access
and if it has been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the conservation authority that the
control of flooding, erosion, pollution, dynamic beaches or the conservation of land will
not be affected;
Notwithstanding Section 4.4.3.1.1),minor placement and removal of fill and site grading
within the shoreline flood hazard may be permitted if it has been demonstrated to the
dynamic beaches or the conservation of land will not be affected.
permitted within the shoreline flood hazard if it has been demonstrated to the satisfaction
beaches or the conservation of land will not be affected. The replacement system should
be located outside of the shoreline flood hazard where possible and only permitted within
the shoreline flood hazard in the area of lowest risk.
Notwithstanding Section 4.4.3.1.1), above ground parking lots may be permitted within
the shoreline flood hazard if it has been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the
or the conservation of land will not be affected and that safe pedestrian and vehicular
access is achieved.
4.4.3.2 Development within the Allowance Adjacent to the Shoreline Flood Hazard
Development may be permitted within the allowance adjacent to the shoreline flood
hazard if it has been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the conservation authority that
the control of flooding, erosion, pollution, dynamic beaches or the conservation of land
will not be affected. The submitted plans should demonstrate that:
a)
development does not aggravate the flood hazard or create a new one;
59
b)
c)
d)
evacuation; and
The natural features and/or ecological functions associated with conservation of
land are protected, pollution is prevented and erosion and dynamic beach hazards
have been adequately addressed.
4.4.3.3 Development within the Shoreline Erosion Hazard
For the purpose of the following policy, the shoreline erosion hazard is the limit of the landward
extent of the stable slope measured from the existing protected or unprotected toe of slope, plus
the limit of the 100-year erosion limit.
1)
In general, development shall not be permitted within the shoreline erosion hazard;
2)
In general, stabilization works within the shoreline erosion hazard to allow for
future/proposed development or an increase in development envelope or area shall not be
permitted;
3)
In general, development within the shoreline erosion hazard on vacant lots of record shall
not be permitted;
4)
In general, stormwater management facilities within the shoreline erosion hazard shall
not be permitted;
5)
Further to Section 4.4.3.3.1), development shall be prohibited in the shoreline erosion
a)
b)
emergency as a result of erosion, or protection works/measures, or
c)
substances;
6)
Notwithstanding Section 4.4.3.3.1), public and private infrastructure (e.g. roads, sewers,
flood and erosion control works) and various utilities (e.g. pipelines) may be permitted
within the shoreline erosion hazard subject to the activity being approved through a
dynamic beaches or the conservation of land will not be affected;
7)
permitted within the shoreline erosion hazard if it has been demonstrated to the
8)
Notwithstanding Section 4.4.3.3.1.), shoreline, bank, and slope stabilization to protect
the shoreline erosion hazard subject to the activity being approved through a satisfactory
60
9)
10)
11)
Notwithstanding Section 4.4.3.3.1), development associated with minor additions, nonhabitable accessory, buildings and pools may be permitted within the shoreline erosion
hazard if it has been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Conservation Authority that
a)
there is no feasible alternative site outside of the shoreline erosion hazard or in the
event that there is no feasible alternative site, that the proposed development is
located in an area of least (and acceptable) risk;
b)
no development is located within the stable slope allowance;
c)
there is no impact on existing and future slope stability and bank stabilization;
d)
development will not prevent access into and along the shoreline erosion hazard
in order to undertake preventative actions/maintenance or during an emergency;
e)
development will have no negative impacts on natural shoreline processes;
f)
plans;
g)
land are protected, pollution is prevented, and flooding, and dynamic beach
within the shoreline erosion hazard such as landscaping retaining walls, grading, decks,
stairs, etc., may be permitted if it has been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the
or the conservation of land will not be affected. The submitted plans should demonstrate
that:
a)
there is no feasible alternative site outside of the shoreline erosion hazard or in the
event that there is no feasible alternative site, that the proposed development is
located in an area of least (and acceptable) risk;
b)
development will not prevent access into and through the shoreline erosion hazard
in order to undertake preventative actions/maintenance or during an emergency;
c)
there is no impact on existing and future slope stability and bank stabilization;
d)
development will have no negative impacts on natural shoreline processes;
e)
plans; and
f)
land are protected, pollution is prevented, flooding hazards, and dynamic beach
relocation of a building within the shoreline erosion hazard, provided that it has not been
damaged or destroyed by erosion and if it has been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the
conservation authority that the control of flooding, erosion, pollution or dynamic beaches
or conservation of land will not be affected. The submitted plans should demonstrate that
the building:
61
a)
b)
c)
1)
will not exceed original habitable floor area nor the original footprint of the
previous structure.
4.4.3.4 Development within the Allowance Adjacent to the Shoreline Erosion
Hazard
Development may be permitted within the allowance adjacent to the shoreline erosion
a)
development does not aggravate the erosion hazard or create a new one;
b)
evacuation;
c)
erosion and sediment control and site stabilization/restoration plans; and
d)
the natural features and/or ecological functions associated with conservation of
land are protected, pollution is prevented and erosion and dynamic beach
4.4.3.5 Development within the Dynamic Beach Hazard
For the purpose of the following policies the Dynamic Beach Hazard is the limit of the landward
extent of the 100-year flood elevation limit, plus the allowance for wave uprush and other waterrelated hazards, plus the dynamic beach allowance. The dynamic beach allowance is 30 metres
on the Great Lakes and interconnecting channels.
1)
In general, development shall not be permitted in the dynamic beach hazard;
2)
Further to Section 4.4.3.5.1), development shall be prohibited in the dynamic beach
a)
An institutional use associated with hospitals, nursing homes, preschool, school
as a result of erosion or any other hazard associated with dynamic beaches or as a
result of failure of protection works/measures; or
b)
An essential emergency service such that provided by fire, police and ambulance
stations and electrical substations, which would be impaired during an emergency
as a result of erosion or any other hazard associated with dynamic beaches and/or
as a result of failure of protection works/measures; or
c)
Associated with the disposal, manufacture, treatment or storage of hazardous
substances.
3)
Notwithstanding Section 4.4.3.5.1), underground public infrastructure (i.e. sewers) and
various utilities (e.g. pipelines) may be permitted within the dynamic beach hazard
subject to the activity being approved through a satisfactory Environmental Assessment
process and/or if it has been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the conservation
62
4)
5)
1)
authority that the control of flooding, erosion, pollution, dynamic beaches or the
permitted within the dynamic beach hazard if it has been demonstrated to the satisfaction
Notwithstanding Section 4.4.3.5.1), conservation or restoration projects may be permitted
within the dynamic beach hazard subject to the activity being approved through a
4.4.3.6 Development within the Allowance Adjacent to the Dynamic Beach
Hazard
Development may be permitted within the allowance adjacent to the dynamic beach
the control of flooding, erosion, pollution, dynamic beach or the conservation of land will
a)
development does not create or aggravate the dynamic beach hazard;
b)
development does not prevent access to and along the dynamic beach;
c)
d)
the natural features and/or ecological functions contributing to the conservation of
land are protected, pollution is prevented and flooding and erosion hazards have
been adequately addressed;
4.5
Hazardous Lands
The following section indicates how the extent of hazardous lands is determined for the purpose
of administering the Regulation. The NVCA’s Regulation contains the following sections
dealing with hazardous lands.
2. (1) Subject to section 3, no person shall undertake development or permit another
person to undertake development in or on areas within the jurisdiction of the
Authority that are:
…
d) hazardous lands;”
3. (1) The Authority may grant permission for development in or on the areas described
in subsection 2(1) if, in its opinion, the control of flooding, erosion, dynamic
63
beaches, pollution or the conservation of land will not be affected by the
development.
(2) The permission of the Authority shall be given in writing, with or without
conditions.”
4.5.2 Discussion of Hazardous Land
Hazardous land means land that could be unsafe for development because of naturally occurring
processes associated with flooding, erosion, dynamic beaches or unstable soil or bedrock. Please
note that this section applies to activities located within unstable soil and unstable bedrock
hazardous lands; otherwise refer to the River and Stream Valleys and Great Lakes and Large
Inland Lakes Shorelines sections for other hazardous lands such as flooding, erosion, and
Shoreline section for dynamic beaches.
Due to the specific nature of areas of unstable soil or unstable bedrock, it is difficult to identify
these hazards. The potential for catastrophic failures in some areas of unstable soil and unstable
bedrock warrant site specific studies to determine the extent of these hazardous lands, and
therefore the appropriate limits of the hazard and Regulation Limits. The regulated area is based
on the conclusions and recommendations of such studies.
Development within areas deemed as hazardous is considered through the ‘development’
provision of the Regulation. Activities proposed within unstable soil and unstable bedrock
hazardous lands must therefore meet the definition of “development” in the Conservation
Authorities Act to be regulated (see Section 6.0).
4.5.2.1 Unstable Soil
Unstable soil includes but is not necessarily limited to areas identified as containing sensitive
marine clays (e.g. leda clays) or organic soils (Conservation Ontario & Ministry of Natural
Resources, 2005).
4.5.2.1.1 Sensitive Marine Clays (Leda Clay)
Sensitive marine clays, also known as leda clays, are clays that were deposited as sediment
during the last glacial period in the Champlain Sea. Undisturbed, the clays can appear as solid
and stable. But when disturbed by excessive vibration, shock or when they become saturated
with water, the clays can turn to liquid (MNR, 2001). The resulting failures or earthflows can be
sudden and catastrophic.
Sensitive marine clays are restricted to specific locations in the province, however, are not
restricted to just along rivers and streams In addition to the mapping that individual conservation
authorities may have developed or obtained, information is also available from the Geological
Survey of Canada and the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources.
To determine Regulation limits, it is recommended that site specific studies be undertaken to
determine the full extent of the sensitive marine clays and their full potential for retrogressive
failures. While useful standards for defining the limits of the hazardous lands are provided
within the Ministry of Natural Resources Understanding Natural Hazards (2001) document and
Hazardous Sites Technical Guide (MNR, 1996a), it is crucial to recognize that these standards
64
only address a first occurrence of slope failure. As such, the Guidelines for Developing
Schedules of Regulated Areas recommend the use of a site/area specific study in defining the
appropriate hazard (and therefore the Regulation Limit) to account for the potential of
subsequent failures.
Section 3.0 of the Hazardous Sites Technical Guide (MNR, 1996a) provides important guidance
with respect to assessing marine sensitive clays and the potential for development within this
type of hazardous lands.
4.5.2.1.2
Organic Soils
Organic soils are normally formed by the decomposition of vegetative and organic materials into
humus, a process known as humification. A soil is organic when the percentage weight loss of
the soil, when heated, is five to eighty per cent (MNR, 2001).
As a result, organic soils can cover a wide variety of soil types. Peat soils are the most common
type of organic soil in Ontario. Therefore, a conservation authority’s wetland inventory may
provide guidance in the location of organic soils. In addition, soil maps by the Ministry of
Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs and maps by the Geological Survey of Canada, Ontario
Ministry of Natural Resources, and Ministry of Northern Development & Mines provide
information on the location of organic soils.
Due to the high variability of organic soils, the potential risks and hazards associated with
development in this type of hazardous land are also highly variable. As such, assessment of
development potential in areas of organic soils is site specific. Section 4.0 of the Hazardous
Sites Technical Guide (MNR, 1996a) provides important guidance in this regard.
4.5.2.2
Unstable Bedrock
Unstable bedrock includes but is not necessarily limited to areas identified as karst formations.
Karst formations may be present in limestone or dolomite bedrock, and are extremely variable in
nature. Local, site-specific studies are required for identifying karst formations. Air photo
interpretation of surface features such as sink holes may provide an indication of karst
formations (Ministry of Natural Resources and Conservation Ontario, 2005).
As with unstable soils, the potential for development to be undertaken safely in an area of
unstable bedrock is site specific. Section 5.0 of the Hazardous Sites Technical Guide (MNR,
1996a) provides important guidance in this regard.
4.5.3 Implementation Guidelines for Hazardous Lands
The following sections outline the guidelines for implementing NVCA’s Regulation with respect
to unstable soil and bedrock. The Authority, in its role through the planning process will review
planning applications to ensure that in general all development occurs outside the unstable soil
and bedrock boundaries.
4.5.3.1
1)
Development Within Unstable Soil and Unstable Bedrock Hazardous
Lands
In general, development shall not be permitted within hazardous lands associated with
unstable soils or unstable bedrock.
65
2)
3)
4)
Further to Section 4.5.3.1.1), development shall be prohibited in hazardous lands
associated with unstable soils or unstable bedrock where the use is:
a)
An institutional use associated with hospitals, nursing homes, preschool, school
as a result of erosion or any other hazard associated with unstable soils and
unstable bedrock and/or as a result of failure of protection works/measures; or
b)
An essential emergency service such as that provided by fire, police and
ambulance stations and electrical substations, which would be impaired during an
emergency as a result of erosion or any other hazard associated with unstable soils
and unstable bedrock and/or as a result of failure of protection works/measures; or
c)
Associated with the disposal, manufacture, treatment or storage of hazardous
substances;
erosion control works) and various utilities (e.g. pipelines) may be permitted within
hazardous lands associated with unstable soil or bedrock subject to the activity being
demonstrated to the satisfaction of the conservation authority that the control of
flooding, erosion, pollution, or the conservation of land will not be affected;
relocation of a building within hazardous lands associated with unstable soils or bedrock
provided it has been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the conservation authority that
the control of flooding, erosion, pollution or conservation of land will not be affected.
The submitted plans should demonstrate that:
a)
There is no feasible alternative site outside of the hazardous lands;
b)
The control of flooding, erosion, pollution or the conservation of land will not be
affected; and,
c)
All hazards/risks associated with unstable soils or unstable bedrock have been
4.6
Watercourses
The NVCA’s Regulation contains the following sections dealing with watercourses:
“Alterations prohibited
5.
Subject to section 6, no person shall straighten, change, divert or interfere in any way
with the existing channel of a river, creek, stream or watercourse or change or interfere in any
way with a wetland.”
“Permission to alter
6. (1) The Authority may grant a person permission to straighten, change, divert or interfere
with the existing channel of a river, creek, stream or watercourse or to change or interfere with a
wetland.
66
6. (2) The permission of the Authority shall be given in writing, with or without conditions.
4.6.2 Discussion of Watercourses
Watercourse means an identifiable depression in the ground in which a flow of water regularly or
continuously occurs. These policies must be read in conjunction with Section 4.3 of this
document, River and Stream Valleys.
To provide guidance in the regulation of watercourses, it is necessary to highlight the functions
of watercourses.
4.6.2.1
Function of Watercourses
Watercourses transport both water and sediment from areas of high elevation to areas of low
elevation. Watercourses also transfer energy (e.g. heating and cooling of stream waters) and
organisms (e.g. movement of mammals, fish schooling and insect swarming) and provide habitat
for fish and other species either in-stream or at the air-water interface. Watercourses also
provide a source of water supply for wildlife and livestock.
From a human perspective, watercourses provide social and economic values such as water
supply, food resources, recreational opportunities (canoeing and fishing), hydro generation, land
drainage, education experiences, and aesthetics.
Watercourses are dynamic, living systems with complex processes that are constantly
undergoing change. The structure and function of watercourses are influenced by channel
morphology, sediment characteristics (soil type, bedrock, and substrate characteristics) and the
nature of the riparian vegetation both on the overbank and rooted in the bed of the watercourse.
Any changes to one of these influences can have significant impacts upon other parts of the
system. One of the key influences on the structure and function of watercourses is related to the
hydrology of the stream and its normal hydrograph. Changes in the volume, peaks and timing of
flows can significantly impact the stream morphology, sediment transport and even riparian
vegetation.
Changes to channel morphology reduce the ability of the watercourse to process sediment
causing erosion and changing the amount or size of bed load being moved. Loss of riparian
vegetation results in more pollutants and run-off being transferred from the land to the water,
impacting water quality and flooding downstream reaches. These changes, in turn, degrade near
shore and aquatic habitat and impair the watercourse for human use.
4.6.3 Implementation Guidelines for Watercourses
The following sections outline the guidelines for implementing the NVCA’s Regulation with
respect to watercourses. The term “interference” below includes all alterations mentioned within
the NVCA’s Regulation (straighten, change, divert or interfere in any way). The Authority, in its
role through the planning process, will review planning applications to ensure watercourse
alterations associated with development are appropriate.
1)
4.6.3.1
Interference with Watercourses
In general, interference with a watercourse shall not be permitted;
67
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
erosion control works) and various utilities (e.g. pipelines) may be permitted within a
watercourse subject to the activity being approved through a satisfactory Environmental
Assessment process or through other studies deemed necessary by the conservation
authority and/ or if the interference on the natural features and hydrologic and ecological
functions of the watercourse has been deemed to be acceptable by the conservation
authority;
Notwithstanding Section 4.6.3.1.1), stream, bank, and channel stabilization to protect
existing development or conservation or restoration projects may be permitted within a
watercourse if the interference on the natural features and hydrologic and ecological
functions of the watercourse has been deemed to be acceptable by the conservation
cuthority;
Notwithstanding Section 4.6.3.1.1), any works that are to be located below the bed of the
river within a watercourse shall be located below the long-term scour depth to the
satisfaction of the conservation authority;
Notwithstanding Section 4.6.3.1.1), minor interference and/or alteration may be
permitted within a watercourse if it has been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the
conservation authority that the interference is acceptable on the natural features and
hydrologic and ecological functions of the watercourse;
Notwithstanding Section 4.6.3.1.1), major interference (e.g. realignment, dam, enclosure,
pond) with a watercourse may be permitted where supported by the recommendations of
a sub-watershed study, Environmental Assessment and/ or if it has been demonstrated to
the satisfaction of the conservation authority that the interference is acceptable for the
natural features and hydrologic and ecological functions of the watercourse;
Notwithstanding Section 4.6.3.1.1), watercourse crossings may be permitted if it has been
demonstrated to the satisfaction of the conservation authority that the interference on the
natural features and hydrologic and ecological functions of the watercourse has been
deemed to be acceptable by the conservation authority. At a minimum, the submitted
plans should demonstrate the following based on morphological characteristics of the
watercourse system6;
culverts have an open bottom where it is feasible, or where it is not feasible, the culverts
should be appropriately embedded into the watercourse;
crossing location, width, and alignment should be compatible with stream morphology,
which typically requires location of the crossing on a straight and shallow/riffle reach of
the watercourse with the crossing situated at right angles to the watercourse;
the crossing is sized and located such that there is no increase in upstream or downstream
erosion or flooding;
the design should consider fish and wildlife passage;
have regard for upstream and downstream effects when installing/replacing a culvert.
4.7
Wetlands And Other Areas
The NVCA’s Regulation contains the following sections dealing with wetlands:
6
Refer to the Adaptive Management of Stream Corridors in Ontario (Stream Corridor Project Management
Team, 2001) document for more information.
68
2. (1) Subject to section 3, no person shall undertake development or permit another person to
undertake development in or on areas within the jurisdiction of the Authority that are:
(d) wetlands or
(e) other areas where development could interfere with the hydrologic function of a wetland,
including areas within 120 metres of all provincially-significant wetlands and wetlands greater
than 2 hectares in size, and areas within 30 metres of wetlands less than 2 hectares in size, but
not including those where development has been approved pursuant to an application made
under the Planning Act or other public planning or regulatory process.
3.(1) The Authority may grant permission for development in or on the areas described in
subsection 2(1) if, in its opinion, the control of flooding, erosion, dynamic beaches, pollution or
the conservation of land will not be affected by the development.
(2) The permission of the Authority shall be given in writing, with or without conditions.
“Alterations prohibited
5.
Subject to section 6, no person shall … change or interfere in any way with a wetland.”
“Permission to alter
6. (1) The Authority may grant a person permission …to change or interfere with a wetland.
6. (2) The permission of the Authority shall be given in writing, with or without conditions.”
4.7.2 Additional Definitions
The following section outlines additional definitions to those provided in Section 6 of this
document.
A wetland means land that:
a) is seasonally or permanently covered by shallow water or has a water table close to or
at its surface,
b) directly contributes to the hydrological function of a watershed through connection
with a surface watercourse,
c) has hydric soils, the formation of which has been caused by the presence of abundant
water, and
d) has vegetation dominated by hydrophytic plants or water tolerant plants, the
dominance of which has been favoured by the presence of abundant water, but does not
69
include periodically soaked or wet land that is used for agricultural purposes and no
longer exhibits a wetland characteristic referred to in clause c) or d).
4.7.2.1
From the Provincial Policy Statement
Hydrologic Function means:
The functions of the hydrological cycle that include the occurrence, circulation, distribution and
chemical and physical properties of water on the surface of the land, in the soil and underlying
rocks, and in the atmosphere, and water’s interaction with the environment including its relation
to living things.
This is a comprehensive definition for the hydrologic cycle, which allows many factors to be
considered when reviewing interference to wetlands. The Southern Ontario Wetland Evaluation
System (MNR, 1993b) states “it must be recognized that many non-hydrological functions of a
wetland depend, in part on the wetland’s hydrological setting and that changes in the basin
beyond the boundaries of the wetland could have an effect on the ecological value of the
wetland.”
4.7.2.2
Additional Interpretations
The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) differentiates between wetlands in northern and southern
Ontario. The NVCA’s watershed is located in Southern Ontario (Ecoregions 5E, 6E and 7E) and
the following PPS policy applies:
“Development and site alteration shall not be permitted in:
(b)
significant wetlands in Ecoregions 5E, 6E and 7E”
It should be noted that the Conservation Authorities Act and the NVCA’s Regulation use the
wording “in any way” when describing change or interference with a wetland. Activities
proposed within the wetland boundary that could interfere in any way with the wetland,
including both those activities that meet the definition of “development” and those that do not
necessarily meet the definition of “development” are regulated as described in Sections 5 and 6
of the Regulation. An example of an activity that does not strictly meet the definition of
“development” and could represent interference is vegetation removal.
There are a variety of sources for identifying wetlands. Many wetlands have been identified
thorough the provincial wetland evaluation program. The NVCA has also identified wetlands as
part of other watershed programs such as the natural heritage and the Regulation mapping
programs.
The province uses the Ontario Wetland Evaluation System (OWES), originally developed in
1983, to identify and evaluate wetlands primarily to support land use planning processes under
the Planning Act. The OWES manual for the NVCA is the Southern Ontario Wetland
Evaluation System (MNR, 1993a). Wetlands identified and evaluated using the OWES can be a
valuable resource for implementing Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act, however, it
is important to note that a wetland must meet the definition of ‘wetland’ within the Conservation
Authorities Act .
70
4.7.3 Discussion of Wetlands and Other Areas
To provide guidance in the regulating of wetlands and the associated allowances, it is necessary
to outline the functions of wetlands.
4.7.3.1
Functions of Wetlands
Wetlands provide functions that have both ecosystem and human values. From an ecosystem
perspective, these include primary production, sustaining biodiversity, wildlife habitat, habitat
for species at risk, maintenance of natural cycles (carbon, water) and food chains. From a human
perspective, wetlands provide social and economic values such as flood attenuation, recreation
opportunities, production of valuable products, improvement of water quality and educational
benefits.
Wetlands retain waters during periods of high water levels or peak flows (i.e. spring freshet and
storm events) allowing the water to be slowly released into the watercourse, infiltrate into the
ground, and evaporate. As well, wetlands within the floodplain of a watercourse provide an area
for the storage of flood waters and reduce the energy associated with the flood waters.
Wetlands retain and modify nutrients, chemicals and silt in surface and groundwater thereby
improving water quality. This occurs temporarily in the plants of the wetland but long term in
the organic soils.
In addition, wetlands provide a variety of hydrologic functions. More than 60 potential
hydrological functions have been identified for wetlands when developing the Southern Ontario
Wetland Evaluation System. However, confirmation of many of these functions requires
hydrological experts and field studies by qualified hydrologists. Therefore, the Ontario Wetland
Evaluation System utilizes easily identifiable features and measures as surrogate values for these
hydrological features.
4.7.3.2
Development and Interference
There are three “categories” through which the Conservation Authorities Act and NVCA’s
Regulation address wetlands and other areas (areas of interference or adjacent lands within
which development may interfere with the hydrologic function of the wetland - Figure 14)
¾ Development within the wetland boundary (Section 2.1 (d) of Regulation)
To be regulated, the activity must meet the definition of development (see Glossary,
Section 6). Applications for development must be assessed with respect to the five
“tests” outlined in the Conservation Authorities Act (control of flooding, erosion,
pollution, dynamic beaches and the conservation of land);
¾ Development within the “other areas” (Section 2.1 (e) of Regulation)
To be regulated, the activity must meet the definition of development. Applications for
development must be assessed only with respect to the hydrologic function of the
adjacent wetland; and
¾ Interference with Wetlands (Section 5 of Regulation)
To be regulated, the activity must occur within the wetland boundary and must constitute
interference in any way with the wetland. Applications for interference must be assessed
71
with respect to the natural features and hydrologic and ecological functions of the
wetland.
Other Areas
(30 or 120 metres)
Wetland
Development (as defined in the Act),
assessed with respect to the control of
flooding, erosion, pollution, dynamic
beaches and conservation of land.
Development (as defined in the Act),
assessed with respect to the hydrologic
function of the wetland.
Interference in any way with the wetland,
assessed with respect to the natural
features and hydrologic and ecological
functions of the wetland.
Figure 14: Three ways through which the Conservation Authorities Act and NVCA’s Regulation
address wetlands and other areas.
Portions of wetlands may also be regulated due to presence of hazardous lands such as regulated
floodplains or unstable soils. The applicable sections of this guideline document should be
referenced with respect to these hazards.
Removal, filling, dredging, or changing the hydrologic regime of wetlands (e.g. ponds or drains)
can result in reducing the capacity of wetlands to retain water. This can result in higher flows in
watercourses with resulting increases in flooding and erosion. As well, with no ability to retain
water, the ability to recharge the aquifer is reduced, and the hydrologic cycle is modified.
Development in wetlands has the potential to interfere with many of the natural features or
ecological functions of wetlands. Development may remove or impact wildlife species and their
habitat, degrade or remove natural vegetation communities and impair water quality and quantity
in both surface and groundwater. As a result, development within wetlands can impact
conservation of land.
Many wetlands develop on organic soils and, as a result, when reviewing development within a
wetland, the soil composition should be reviewed. Where the soils are organic then Section 4.5
(Hazardous Lands) should also be reviewed and the policies from this section should be
incorporated in the decision making.
Pollution from development in the form of improperly installed or maintained septic systems or
urban runoff has the potential to interfere with the wetland. Proposals to drain stormwater
management facilities into wetlands do not benefit the wetland through constant flows for
dilution and moving particulate matter. Nutrients, chemicals, and sediments could enter the
wetland impeding the function of the wetland.
72
When reviewing an application with respect to interference or development, the evaluation done
under the Ontario Wetland Evaluation System (OWES) may be used as an information resource
because it identifies the features and functions of the wetland. It should be noted that when
reviewing an application with respect to development under the Regulation, the significance of
the wetland as determined by the OWES is not a reason to deny or approve the application. The
application must be reviewed with respect to the control of flooding, erosion, pollution, dynamic
beaches or the conservation of land.
Determining what represents an interference can be very challenging and is dependant on a
variety of parameters such as the type and the scale of activity. The legal and practical
implications associated with regulating interference will require ongoing discussions and court
decisions over the upcoming years.
Many individual and cumulative hydrologic impacts to a wetland commonly occur within the
catchment area of the wetland. It is important to consider the linkages between small wetlands
and headwater areas, impacts of stormwater, and upstream constrictions to flow. Impacts to the
hydrologic function of a wetland due to development within the “other areas” may also result
from changes in imperviousness/infiltration due to a removal or change in vegetation, soil
compaction during construction, disruption or alteration of groundwater flow paths due to
underground construction, etc.
Subsection 2.(1) of the NVCA’s Regulation contain a clause specific to “other areas” which
indicates that this regulated area does not include areas “where development has been approved
pursuant to an application made under the Planning Act or other public planning or regulatory
process.” As conservation authorities only regulate the “other areas” with respect to the
hydrologic function of the adjacent wetland, this proviso was included to recognize that a
conservation authority should not require regulatory approvals where, prior to the enactment of
the individual conservation authority Regulation, the “interference” with a wetland had already
occurred and where future development was supported by a study demonstrating the
development did not interfere with the hydrologic function of a wetland. However, this clause
has been subject to interpretations which are contrary to what the province intended and
conservation authorities have been advised to apply the interference requirements of Subsection
2(1) to all new development (see Appendix 8: MNR Legal Services Branch letter dated June 11,
2007).
4.7.3.4
Technical Analysis
4.7.3.4.1.
‘Interfere in Any Way’
As part of the review of an application, the NVCA may request an Environmental Impact Study
(EIS) to address interference with a wetland. An EIS is a mechanism for assessing impacts to
determine the suitability of a proposal. The submission of an EIS does not guarantee approval of
the works. An EIS must be carried out by a qualified professional, with recognized expertise in
the appropriate area of concern and shall be prepared using established procedures and
recognized methodologies to the satisfaction of the Authority. Appendix 7 provides additional
details on what an EIS may contain.
73
4.7.4 Implementation Guidelines for Wetlands and Other Areas
The following sections outline guidelines for implementing the NVCA’s Regulation with respect
to wetlands and ‘other areas.’ The NVCA, in its role through the planning process, should
review planning applications to ensure that, in general all development can occur outside and be
set back an appropriate distance from the wetland boundaries.
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
4.7.4.1
Development and Interference Within Wetlands
In general, development and interference shall not be permitted within wetlands;
In general, ponds and drains shall not be permitted within wetlands;
In general, stormwater management facilities shall not be permitted within wetlands;
erosion control works) and various utilities (e.g. pipelines) may be permitted within a
wetland subject to the activity being approved through a satisfactory Environmental
Assessment process and/ or if it has been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the
of land will not be affected and the interference on the natural features and
hydrologic and ecological functions of the wetland has been deemed to be acceptable by
the conservation authority;
Notwithstanding Section 4.7.4.1.1), conservation or restoration projects may be permitted
within a wetland if it has been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the conservation
authority that the control of flooding, erosion, pollution or the conservation of land will
not be affected and the interference on the natural features and hydrologic and ecological
functions of the wetland has been deemed to be acceptable by the conservation
authority;
passive or low intensity outdoor recreation and education, trail system) may be permitted
within a wetland if it has been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the conservation
authority that the control of flooding, erosion, pollution or the conservation of land will
not be affected and the interference on the natural features and hydrologic and
ecological functions of the wetland has been deemed to be acceptable by the
conservation authority.
4.7.4.2
Development Within “Other Areas”
The NVCA’s Regulation identifies “other areas” as follows:
“Other areas where development could interfere with the hydrologic function of a wetland,
including areas within 120 metres of all provincially-significant wetlands and wetlands greater
than 2 hectares in size, and areas within 30 metres of wetlands less than 2 hectares in size, but
not including those where development has been approved pursuant to an application made
under the Planning Act or other public planning or regulatory process.”
1)
4.7.4.2.1
Area Within 30 Metres of the Wetland
In general, development shall not be permitted within 30 metres of the boundary of the
wetland;
74
2)
3)
4)
5)
1)
2)
3)
Notwithstanding Section 4.7.4.2.1.1), public infrastructure (e.g. roads, sewers, flood and
erosion control works) and various utilities (e.g. pipelines) may be permitted within 30
metres of a wetland if the interference on the hydrologic functions of the wetland has
been deemed to be acceptable by the conservation authority;
Notwithstanding Section 4.7.4.2.1.1), conservation or restoration projects may be
permitted within 30 metres of a wetland if the interference on the hydrologic functions of
the wetland has been deemed to be acceptable by the conservation authority;
Notwithstanding Section 4.7.4.2.1.1), development associated with public parks (e.g.
passive or low intensity outdoor recreation and education, trail system) may be permitted
within 30 meters of a wetland if the interference on the hydrologic functions of the
wetland has been deemed to be acceptable by the conservation authority;
Notwithstanding Section 4.7.4.2.1.1), single family buildings or structures may be
permitted within 30 metres of a wetland on vacant lots of record if the interference on
the hydrologic function of the wetland has been deemed to be acceptable by the
conservation authority. An Environmental Impact Study to assess the hydrologic impact
shall be required if the submitted plans do not demonstrate the following:
a)
All development (including grading) is located outside the regulated
wetland and maintains as much setback as feasible;
b)
Disturbances to natural vegetation communities contributing to the
hydrologic function of the wetland are avoided;
c)
The overall existing drainage patterns for the lot will be maintained;
d)
Disturbed area and soil compaction is minimized;
e)
Development is located above the high water table;
f)
All septic systems are located a minimum of 15 metres from the wetland
and a minimum of 0.9 metres above the water table;
g)
Impervious areas are minimized;
h)
Best Management Practices are used to:
i)
maintain water balance
ii)
control sediment and erosion
iii)
buffer wetlands
4.7.4.2.2
Area Between 30 Metres to 120 Metres of the Wetland
In general, development may be permitted in the area between 30 metres to 120 metres of
a wetland if the interference on the hydrologic functions of the wetland has been
deemed to be acceptable by the conservation authority;
Further to Section 4.7.4.2.2.1), public infrastructure (e.g. roads, sewers, flood and erosion
control works) and various utilities (e.g. pipelines) may be permitted in the area between
30 metres to 120 metres of a wetland subject to the activity being approved through a
satisfactory Environmental Assessment process and/or if the interference on the
hydrologic functions of the wetland has been deemed to be acceptable by the
conservation authority;
Further to Section 4.7.4.2.2.1), conservation or restoration projects may be permitted in
the area between 30 metres to 120 metres of a wetland if the interference on the
hydrologic functions of the wetland has been deemed to be acceptable by the
conservation authority;
75
4)
Further to Section 4.7.4.2.2.1), development associated with public parks (e.g. passive or
low intensity outdoor recreation and education, trail system) may be permitted in the area
between 30 metres to 120 metres of a wetland if the interference on the hydrologic
functions of the wetland has been deemed to be acceptable by the conservation
authority;
Further to Section 4.7.4.2.2.1), single family buildings or structures may be permitted in
the area between 30 metres to 120 metres of a wetland on vacant lots of record if the
interference on the hydrologic functions of the wetland has been deemed to be acceptable
by the conservation authority. An Environmental Impact Study to assess the hydrologic
impact shall be required if the submitted plans do not demonstrate the following:
a)
Disturbances to natural vegetation communities contributing to the hydrologic
function of the wetland are avoided;
b)
The overall existing drainage for the lot will be maintained;
c)
Disturbed area and soil compaction is minimized;
d)
Development is located above the high water table;
e)
All septic systems are located at a minimum 0.9 metres above the water table;
f)
Impervious areas are minimized;
g)
Best Management Practices are used to:
i)
maintain water balance
ii)
control erosion and sediment
iii)
buffer wetlands
5) Further to Section 4.7.4.2.2.1), larger scale development associated with large commercial
uses, industrial uses, multiple residential uses (condominiums, apartments, townhouses, etc.)
and/or development into the water table may be permitted in the area between 30 metres to
120 metres of a wetland if the interference on hydrologic functions of the wetland has been
deemed to be acceptable by the conservation authority. An Environmental Impact Study to
assess the hydrologic impact shall be required.
4.8
Additional NVCA Natural Hazards Guidelines
The following are additional guidelines for development within natural hazards. Some of these
guidelines have evolved as a result of local conditions and watershed characteristics.
Repairs/Renovations
Repairs and renovations to an existing structure within the existing roofline and exterior walls
and above the existing foundation do not require the permission of the NVCA.
Replacement of Damaged or Destroyed Structures
The objective of the NVCA in regulating the reconstruction of existing buildings within the flood
plain is to allow for the continuance of existing uses, while ensuring that the risk of flood
damages to buildings and their contents and the risk to public safety are not increased.
The replacement of existing buildings within the floodplain which have been damaged or
destroyed by fire or other natural disasters (other than flooding) will be permitted provided that
the following requirements are adhered to:
(a)
the former building was in a habitable condition prior to its
destruction and documentation is provided by the applicant to the
76
(b)
(c)
satisfaction of the NVCA. Permission will generally be refused for the
reconstruction of derelict or abandoned structures within the floodplain.
the replacement structure is to be constructed at the same location, or in a
shallower portion of the floodplain;
the replacement structure is dry flood-proofed employing passive floodproofing measures.
Accessory Structures
Accessory structures which are less than 10 square metres (108 square feet) in size do not require
a permit from the NVCA under Ontario Regulation 172/06. The structure should be attached to a
concrete pad or footings.
The construction of accessory structures larger than 10 square metres shall be subject to the
Authority’s Flood Proofing Standards and the guidelines for development within the flood plain.
Portable or Mobile Buildings and Structures
The NVCA shall generally discourage the placement of portable or mobile buildings (i.e.
recreational trailers/construction trailers/portables) within the floodplain on a permanent basis,
since these structures are highly susceptible to flood damages.
However, the NVCA will allow portable or mobile structures to be located in the floodplain,
provided that these structures are flood-proofed to the regulatory flood level, in order to prevent
flotation, collapse and lateral movement of the structure.
Parking Lots
The NVCA shall discourage the development of parking facilities within the floodplain
whenever possible.
However, in the case when parking facilities are to be located within the floodplain, they must
satisfy the following criteria:
(1)
(2)
(3)
the parking facilities must not be associated with residential use if the depth of
flooding exceeds 0.3 metres;
the parking lot must be designed to take into account the depths and velocity of flood
waters;
the development of the parking lot will not result in an adverse impact in the
floodplain within this reach of the watercourse.
Swimming Pools
The construction of a swimming pool (above ground or in ground) within an area which is
susceptible to flooding represents a potential risk to property damage. For example the pool may
be filled with silt and debris, pumps damaged, and the liners ruined.
Construction of either in ground or above ground swimming pools may be permitted in flood
susceptible areas provided that all of the following conditions are satisfied:
77
(a)
(b)
(c)
The swimming pool plus the associated filter, heater, electrical connections,
chemical storage facilities and change rooms are flood-proofed to a minimum of 0.3
metres above the Regulatory flood elevation;
The side walls and pool bottom of in ground pools are capable of withstanding the
anticipated hydrostatic pressures; and
The placement of fill associated with the flood-proofing of the pool does not have an
adverse impact on flood levels within that portion of the flood plain.
Fences
The construction of a fence does not require approval from the NVCA, provided that the fence
does not restrict the free flow of water during a flooding event.
Flood-Proofing Standards (also see the Technical Standards for Flooding Hazards for flood
proofing and safe access, page 38 of this document)
Generally all new development including roads and lots are to be located above the Regulatory
flood elevation. However, in some cases where new development may be permitted within the
flood plain (e.g. two-zone concept), flood proofing to NVCA and provincial standards will be
required.
Hazard to life is linked to the frequency of flooding, and to depth of flood waters and the
velocity of flow in the floodplain. Depth increases buoyancy and velocity increases instability.
Flood-proofing is defined as a combination of structural changes and/or adjustments
incorporated into the basic design and/or construction of buildings, structures, or properties
which are subject to flooding to reduce or eliminate flooding damages. The variety of
floodproofing options and safe access requirements are too detailed and extensive to include in
these guideline. For more detailed information, please consult Appendix 6: “Floodproofing” of
the “Technical Guide – River and Stream Systems: Flooding Hazard limit” (MNR, 2002a).
However, the following general flood-proofing and safe access standards will apply to
development permitted in flood-prone areas within the NVCA watershed:
¾ To ensure safe access, in the absence of a site specific detailed analysis, it is
recommended that the depths not exceed 0.3 m and velocities not exceed 1.7 m/s.
¾ When evaluating detailed analysis for safe access looking at the combination of depth
and velocity, the NVCA uses the 2x2 rule with a value of 0.4m2/s, providing the depth
does not exceed 0.8m and the velocity does not exceed 1.7 m/s.
¾ All new structures shall be dry flood-proofed using passive flood-proofing measures with
the minimum opening elevation being located at least 0.3 metres above the regulatory
flood elevation.
¾ Exceptions may be permitted for a non-habitable structure, provided that it can be
demonstrated to the satisfaction of the conservation authority that it is not feasible or
appropriate to dry flood-proof the structure. In these instances, the structure shall be
flood-proofed using wet flood-proofing measures to the Regulatory flood elevation.
¾ That the foundation, basement floor, concrete slab floor and structural walls located
below the Regulatory flood elevation must be designed and constructed to withstand the
hydrostatic pressures of elevated water tables and lateral pressures exerted upon them by
78
the regulatory flood. Plans must be signed, stamped and dated by a registered
professional engineer who specializes in structural design.
¾ Construction materials located below the regulatory flood elevation are to be of a type,
which are not subject to deterioration by water or by alternate drying and wetting.
¾ All electrical panels, circuits, outlets and permanently installed electrical equipment is to
be located at least 0.3 metres (1 foot) above the Regulatory flood elevation.
¾ Drains are to be equipped with valves which are capable of being closed manually or
automatically to prevent the backup of floodwaters into the building.
79
5.0
GUIDELINES FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PLAN INPUT AND
REVIEW PROGRAM
5.1
Background to the Plan Input and Review Program
The NVCA provides input to and review of planning and development applications under
legislation and regulations for the Planning Act, the Niagara Escarpment Planning and
Development Act, Environmental Assessment Act and Aggregate Resources Act.
The vast majority of these applications are through the Planning Act (approximately 80%) and
include municipal official plans, zoning by-laws, subdivisions, consents and site plans. The
Niagara Escarpment applications represent about 18% of the applications and Environmental
Assessment Act projects such as bridge and road construction make up about 2%. In most cases
the aggregate applications are considered through the Planning Act; however applications may
also be circulated to the NVCA under the Aggregate Resources Act.
As a watershed-based resource management agency, the NVCA’s mandate includes a variety of
responsibilities and functions in the land use planning and development process under the
Planning Act (for further detail, please refer to the MOU with the province in Appendix 1).
The NVCA has delegated responsibilities from the province with respect to provincial interests
regarding natural hazards encompassed by Section 3.1 of the Provincial Policy Statement, 2005
(PPS, 2005). These delegated responsibilities require the NVCA to review and provide
comments on policy documents (official plans and comprehensive zoning by-laws) and
applications submitted pursuant to the Planning Act as part of the Provincial One-Window Plan
Review Service.
The NVCA, as a ‘public bodies’ pursuant to the Planning Act, is to be notified of policy
documents and planning and development applications as prescribed under the Act. The NVCA
may comment to the municipality planning approval authority on these documents and
applications representing their program and policy interests as a watershed–based resource
management agency.
The NVCA performs a technical advisory role to the County of Simcoe and member
municipalities, under the terms of service agreements (Appendix 2). Plan input and review
comments and technical support at the OMB (upon request), will be provided to the County of
Simcoe on natural heritage and natural hazards perspectives. A streamlining agreement is also in
place with most of the conservation authority’s member municipalities (Appendix 2b) that
provides greater efficiencies in processing consent and minor variance applications. NVCA staff
will continue to work with member municipalities to further streamline the planning process to
provide greater efficiencies and effectiveness and reduce duplication.
The NVCA also has a “level 2 agreement” with the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO)
Canada to administer the review of projects under section 35(1) of the Fisheries Act. The
agreement was established for the conservation and protection of fish habitat and promotion of
good fisheries management. Under this agreement, the NVCA conducts the initial review of
projects (including those part of Planning Act applications) with the potential to affect fish
habitat to determine if there is any harmful alteration, disruption or destruction of fish habitat.
80
If there are potential impacts to fish habitat and they can be mitigated, then the NVCA issues a
letter of advice outlining the steps necessary to mitigate these impacts. If the impacts to fish
habitat cannot be fully mitigated, then the project is forwarded to DFO for further review and
approval.
To assist in achieving the NVCA’s goal, objectives and targets and to meet provincial
legislation, policies and plan obligations, the following summarizes the Plan Input and
Review implementation priorities:
¾ Assist the approval authorities and member municipalities by providing upfront
plan input and pre-consultation and timely plan review responses to circulated
applications.
¾ Provide technical support for our member municipalities at Ontario Municipal
Board hearings.
¾ Assist the County of Simcoe, the City of Barrie and local municipalities (including
those in Dufferin County) with implementation of the Growth Plan for the Greater
Golden Horseshoe. This will be achieved primarily through input to their official
plan updates.
¾ Examine the potential for new or revised partnership agreements with watershed
municipalities, approval authorities and other agencies with regard to streamlining plan
review.
¾ Establish a comprehensive compliance monitoring program for the Authority’s
Regulation.
¾ Assist in the development of source water protection plans for the watershed, focusing on
their integration into municipal official plans.
¾ Develop and implement a revenue and workload tracking management database to
provide recommendations for future workload, budget and fee schedule development.
The NVCA can expect a significant amount of development pressure in the future. The Growth
Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe has indicated that the population of Simcoe County,
including the cities of Barrie and Orillia, will increase by approximately 230,000 residents, to a
population of 667,000 by 2031. The Town of Shelburne has also been identified by the Growth
Plan as having growth potential within Dufferin County. The only part of the NVCA’s area of
jurisdiction not covered by the Growth Plan is within Grey County.
The direction set out in the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe will be implemented
through updates to the official plans for Simcoe County, Barrie and the local municipalities
including those in Dufferin County. Simcoe County has prepared its official plan update to be
approved by the province. All local official plans are to be updated, bringing them into
conformity with the Growth Plan by June 2009 and the approved County Plan. However the
province has indicated that it may extend that deadline if their approval of the County Official
Plan is delayed.
The updating of these official plans and by-laws will result in an increased workload in the input
and review of these documents over the next several years. However, once the municipal
documents have been updated and approved, the majority of development should be directed to
81
existing settlement areas on full servicing and that have the potential to be complete
communities. Complete communities are those that meet people’s needs for daily living
(employment, public transportation etc) throughout an entire lifetime.
This trend towards development primarily in settlement areas may have an impact on the
Authority’s programs. There may be less development impacts on rural natural heritage features,
but greater impacts on the receiving streams and the natural features in and adjacent to these
settlement areas.
The following sections outline the guidelines for the Plan Input and Review programs. The
program must be consistent with the direction provided by the provincial legislation, policies and
plans, and help to implement the Authority’s policies (watershed plans, business plan).
Please Note: To maintain consistency, the Plan Input and Review Program
will utilize the Section 28 Regulation technical standards and guidelines as
outlined in section 4.0 of this document; except where planning policies
supported by the PPS, municipal official plans or the Authority’s Board of
Directors, may be more restrictive or comprehensive.
5.2
General Plan Input and Review Implementation Guidelines
The following directions apply to the Plan Input and Review programs to help implement the
NVCA’s watershed and business plans as well as provincial legislation, plans and policies:
• NVCA staff will work with municipal watershed partners (upper and lower tier) to ensure
that the most up-to-date information and science on natural heritage features and areas
and natural hazards are included in the municipal official plans and zoning by-laws.
• NVCA staff will encourage municipalities to go beyond the minimum policy
requirements of the PPS in protecting their natural heritage features. For example, to
maintain consistency with the Authority’s Regulation, and protect a valuable natural
heritage feature, the plan input and review program shall aim to protect all wetlands from
development and site alteration, not just provincially-significant wetlands.
• NVCA staff will work with the municipalities of New Tecumseth, Mono and AdjalaTosorontio to implement the planning requirements for the Oak Ridges Moraine
Conservation Plan and the small portion of the Greenbelt plan within the Town of Mono.
• NVCA staff will in general, ensure that lot lines (including appropriate setbacks) do not
encroach on the natural heritage features or natural hazards being protected. Staff will
recommend that these areas and appropriate setbacks be placed in public ownership as
part of the development application. If this is not possible, then the number of lot lines
extending into the feature must be limited and the area appropriately protected through
the municipality’s zoning by-law and official plan. In some cases conservation easements
may also be used to protect the feature and its functions.
• When reviewing severance applications staff in general, will recommend a minimum of
0.6 hectare of upland area outside of the hazard land or natural feature to accommodate a
single residential dwelling and septic system.
• In general, staff will recommend that no new lots be created that would require a new
crossing of a wetland or hazardous land limit to access a building envelope.
82
5.3
Natural Heritage
Section 2.4.1 of this document outlines the Provincial Policy Statement’s (PPS) Natural Heritage
Policies (Section 2.1). These policies represent the province’s minimum requirements for
protecting the watershed’s natural heritage features and functions. Where municipalities adopt
policies in their official plan that go beyond these minimum requirements to identify and protect
natural heritage features (usually with the Authority’s technical support), staff will support this
policy direction.
The following guidelines reflect the additional direction provided by the Authority’s
watershed/subwatershed and business plans (adopted by the Board of Directors).
Wetlands
¾ To be consistent with the Authority’s Regulation, in general, development and site
alteration shall not be permitted within any wetland.
¾ Sections 4.7 of this document, Wetlands and Adjacent Lands outline the NVCA’s
Regulation requirements for development adjacent to wetlands and the potential impacts
on the hydrologic functions of the wetlands. As stated above, these guidelines will be
used by the plan review program. However, there also may be additional potential
impacts on the wetland’s features and functions (e.g. species at risk) that must be
addressed through the planning process (usually an EIS) to ensure there are no negative
impacts on the wetland.
Natural Heritage Features - Adjacent Lands and Vegetative Buffers
Adjacent Lands:
Section 2.2.1.6 of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) indicates that development and site
alteration shall not be permitted on adjacent lands to the natural heritage feature identified in the
PPS, unless the ecological functions of the adjacent lands have been evaluated and it has been
demonstrated that there will be no negative impacts on the feature or its ecological functions.
This will be determined through the preparation of an Environmental Impact Study.
Staff will use the requirements from the Authority’s Regulation and the province’s
recommendations from the Natural Heritage Reference Manual June 1999 to define the extent
of adjacent lands as follows:
¾ Wetlands greater than 2 hectares (120 metres)
¾ Wetlands less than 2 hectares (30 metres)
¾ Significant habitat of endangered and threatened species (50 metres)
¾ Significant woodlands (50 metres)
¾ Significant valleylands (50 metres)
¾ Significant wildlife habitat (50 metres)
¾ Significant areas of natural and scientific interest (50 metres)
Vegetative and Hazards Buffers:
Buffers will be maintained adjacent to watercourses, natural hazards and significant natural
features through the planning process. The following vegetative buffers are recommended using
the most recent science and technical information available (for example, the Greenbelt Plan and
Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan) to protect those features and functions.
83
In general, lots created through plan of subdivision or consent and/or development and site
alteration, is to be set back a minimum of the following:
¾ 30 metres from the bankfull flow location of watercourses;
¾ 6 metres access allowance from natural hazards and valleylands top of bank
¾ 30 metres from a wetland
¾ 30 metres from a seepage area and springs
¾ 30 metres from a significant woodland
Local Municipal Natural Heritage Systems
Several municipalities have developed their own local natural heritage systems (with the
assistance of NVCA) for their municipality. The Township of Oro-Medonte also developed a
natural heritage system for the Oro Moraine and adopted policies for enhanced protection in its
official plan.
¾ Where appropriate, NVCA staff will provide technical support to those municipalities
that adopt policies in their official plan that go beyond the minimum requirements of the
Provincial Policy Statement to protect their local natural heritage system areas.
5.4
Water Quality and Quantity
Section 2.2 of the Provincial Policy Statement indicates that planning authorities shall protect,
improve or restore the quality and quantity of water and development shall be restricted in or
near sensitive surface and ground water features.
¾ NVCA staff will assist member municipalities to ensure that the appropriate information
and policies from Source Water Protection Plans and other ground water studies are
incorporated into their municipal planning documents to protect surface and ground water
resources.
¾ The NVCA shall provide both ground and surface water quality and quantity technical
support to its municipalities through the review of development applications under the
Planning Act including aggregate operations. Staff use the standards and criteria found in
the NVCA’s Engineering Services Development Review Guidelines (located on the
website) and the Ministry of the Environment’s (MOE) “Stormwater Management
Planning and Design Manual,” (2003).
¾ The NVCA shall provide technical input to MOE concerning the permits to take water
following the Conservation Ontario and local municipal Memorandum of
Understandings, to assist the decision makers in making the most informed decision
possible.
¾ The NVCA shall promote the use of enhanced best management practices through the
review of development applications to ensure the protection and restoration of water
quality and quantity and the implementation of the Assimilative Capacity Study
recommendations.
¾ NVCA staff will continue to work with its partner agencies to promote the development
of an implementation strategy for the recommendations from the Nottawasaga River
Assimilative Capacity Study and to facilitate the achievement of the watershed’s
phosphorus loading targets.
84
5.5
Natural Hazards
As noted above, staff will follow the natural hazards guidelines in Section 4.0 of this document
when providing plan input and review comments. In addition to the guidelines in Section 4.0,
the following guidelines will apply to the plan input and review program when dealing with
natural hazards.
¾ In general, development and site alteration (including lot creation) is not permitted within
the flooding and erosion hazard limits plus a 6 metre allowance (for access).
¾ There also shall be a minimum setback of 30 metres from the bankfull flow location of
watercourses. This setback requirement can be adjusted up or down based on technical
assessments of the actual natural hazard. The NVCA will recommend to the municipality
that the natural hazard with the appropriate setbacks be transferred to a public agency to
provide the maximum protection for the hazard lands in perpetuity.
85
6.0
GLOSSARY
The following section provides the definitions and interpretations from Conservation Ontario’s
Guidelines to Support Conservation Authority Administration of the “Development, Interference
with Wetland and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourse Regulation. They are primarily
from the Conservation Authorities Act and Regulation. It is important to note that the definitions
from the Conservation Authorities Act must govern the implementation of the NVCA’s
Regulation. Some definitions have been included from the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) to
support the Plan Input and Review program.
100-year flood event standard: means that flood based on an analysis of precipitation, snow
melt, or a combination thereof, having a return period of 100 years on average, or having a 1%
chance of occurring or being exceeded in any given year.
Accessory buildings and structures: means a secondary, freestanding, non-habitable building
or structure on the same lot as the main building or structure to which it is subordinate, devoted
exclusively to a use naturally and normally incidental to the main use of the premises.
Area of interference: those lands where development could interfere with the hydrologic
function of a wetland.
Armour: Artificial surfacing of bed, banks, shores or embankments to resist scour or erosion
Basement: means one or more storeys of a building located below the first storey (Building
Code). Crawl Space or cellar shall be considered as a basement if it is,
(a) more than 1,800 mm high between the lowest part of the floor assembly and the
ground or other surface below,
(b) used for any occupancy,
Breakwall/Breakwater: object (especially a groyne or pier) resisting force of waves
Conservation of land: the protection, management, or restoration of lands within the watershed
ecosystem for the purpose of maintaining or enhancing the natural features and hydrologic and
ecological functions within the watershed.
Development (1) as pertaining to the Conservation Authorities Act: a) the construction,
reconstruction, erection or placing of a building or structure of any kind, b) any change to a
building or structure that would have the effect of altering the use or potential use of the building
or structure, increasing the size of the building or structure or increasing the number of dwelling
units in the building or structure, c) site grading, or d) the temporary or permanent placing,
dumping or removal of any material, originating on the site or elsewhere. (definition applied to
section 4)
Development (2): as it pertains to the Planning Act, means the creation of a new lot, a change in
land use, or the construction of buildings and structures, requiring approval under the Planning
86
Act, but does not include: (a) activities that create or maintain infrastructure authorized under an
environmental assessment process; (b) works subject to the Drainage Act (PPS, 2005).
(definition applied to section 5)
Dwelling unit: one or more habitable rooms, occupied or capable of being occupied as an
independent and separate housekeeping establishment, in which separate kitchen and sanitary
facilities are provided for the exclusive use of the occupants.
Dyke: An embankment or wall, usually along a watercourse or floodplain, to prevent overflow
on to adjacent land. Also spelled dike.
Dynamic Beach Hazard: means areas of inherently unstable accumulations of shoreline
sediments along the Great Lakes – St. Lawrence River system and large inland lakes, as
identified by provincial standards, as amended from time to time. The dynamic beach hazard
limit consists of the flooding hazard limit plus a dynamic beach allowance. (PPS 2005)
Erosion: continual loss of earth material (i.e. soil or sediment) over time as a result of the
influence of water or wind.
Erosion Hazard: the loss of land, due to human or natural processes, that poses a threat to life
and property. The erosion hazard limit is determined using considerations that include the
100-year erosion rate (the average annual rate of recession extended over a one hundred year
time span), and an allowance for slope stability
Flood fringe: means the outer portion of the floodplain between the floodway and the flood
hazard limit. Depths and velocities of flooding are generally less severe in the flood fringe than
those experienced in the floodway. (PPS, 2005)
Flooding Hazard: in Ontario, either storm-centred events, flood frequency based events, or an
observed event may be used to determine the extent of the flooding hazard7. These events are:
a)
A storm-centred event, either Hurricane Hazel storm (1954) or Timmins storm
(1961). A storm-centred event refers to a major storm of record which is used for
land-use planning purposes. The rainfall actually experienced during a major
storm event can be transposed over another watershed and when combined with
the local conditions, Regulatory floodplains can be determined. This centring
concept is considered acceptable where the evidence suggests that the storm event
could have potentially occurred over another watershed in the general area;
b)
100-year flood event is a frequency based flood event that is determined through
analysis of precipitation, snow melt, or a combination thereof, having a return
period (or a probability of occurrence) of once every 100 years on average (or
having a 1% chance of occurring or being exceeded in any given year). The
100-year flood event is the minimum acceptable standard for defining the
Regulatory floodplain; and
7
High points of land not subject to flooding but surrounded by floodplain or ”flooded land” are considered to
be within the flood hazard and part of the regulated floodplain.
87
c)
An observed event, which is a flood that is greater that the storm-centred events
or greater that the 100-year flood and which was actually experienced in a
particular watershed, or portion thereof, for example as a result of ice jams8, and
which has been approved as the standard for that specific area by the Minister of
Natural Resources.
Floodplain: means the area, usually low lands adjoining a watercourse, which has been or may
be subject to flood hazards. (PPS, 2005)
Floodproofing standards: means the combination of measures incorporated into the basic
design and/or construction of buildings and structures or properties to reduce or eliminate flood
hazards, wave uprush and other water related hazards along the shoreline of Lake Ontario, and
flood hazards along watercourses. (PPS, 2005)
¾ Dry passive floodproofing – includes the use of fill, columns or design modifications
to elevate openings in the building or structure at or above the level of the flood
hazard. These measures do not require flood warning or any other action to put the
flood protection in effect.
¾ Dry active floodproofing – includes techniques such as installing water tight doors,
seals or floodwalls to prevent water from entering openings below the level of the
flood hazard. Advance warning is almost always required to make the flood
protection operational (i.e. closing of water tight doors, installation of waterproof
protective coverings or windows etc.).
¾ Wet floodproofing – involves designing a building or structure using materials,
methods and design measures that maintain structural integrity by avoiding external
unbalanced forces from acting on buildings or structures during and after a flood, to
reduce flood damage to contents, and to reduce the cost of post-flood clean up.
Buildings and structures are designed so as to intentionally allow flood waters to
enter and exit, ensuring the interior space below the level of the flood hazard remains
unfinished, non-habitable, and free of service units and panels.
Floodway: means the portion of the floodplain where development and site alteration would
cause a danger to public health and safety or property damage.
Where the one-zone concept is applied, the floodway is the entire floodplain.
Where the two-zone concept is applied, the floodway is the inner portion of the floodplain,
representing that area required for the safe passage of flood flow and/or that area where flood
depths and/or velocities are considered to be such that they pose a potential threat to life and/or
property damage. Where the two-zone concept applies, the outer portion of the floodplain is
called the flood fringe. (PPS, 2005)
Gabions: Stone-filled steel wire baskets which can be assembled or stacked to act as retaining
walls or provide slope and erosion protection.
8
However, localized chronic conditions (e.g. ice or debris jams) related to flood-prone areas may be used to
extend the regulated area beyond the Regulatory flood limit without the approval of the Minister of Natural
Resources. It will be necessary to inform the property owner(s) as well as ensure that the revised limits are
reflected in the appropriate municipal documents at the first opportunity.
88
Ground floor area: means the ground area of a lot covered by any part of a building, excluding
decks, patios and similar structures.
Groyne: A structure extending from the shore to prevent erosion and arresting sand movement
along a shoreline.
Habitable: suitable to live in or on (American Heritage Dictionary) OR means that can be
inhabited. Inhabit means to dwell in, occupy.
Hazardous land: land that could be unsafe for development because of naturally occurring
processes associated with flooding, erosion, dynamic beaches or unstable soil or bedrock.
Hydrologic function: the functions of the hydrological cycle that include the occurrence,
circulation, distribution and chemical and physical properties of water on the surface of the land,
in the soil and underlying rocks, and in the atmosphere, and water’s interaction with the
environment including its relation to living things.
Infrastructure: means physical structures (facilities and corridors) that form the foundation for
development. Infrastructure includes: sewage and water systems, septage treatment systems,
waste management systems, electric power generation and transmission,
communications/telecommunications, transit and transportation corridors and facilities, oil and
gas pipelines and associated facilities. (PPS, 2005)
Interference in any way: any anthropogenic act or instance which hinders, disrupts, degrades or
impedes in any way the natural features or hydrologic and ecologic functions of a wetland or
watercourse.
Jetty: Pile or mole running out to protect harbour or coast.
Large inland lakes: waterbodies that have a surface area equal to or greater than 100 square
kilometres, where there is no measurable or predictable response to a single runoff event.
Minor Addition: (within flood and erosion hazard areas) To be considered a “minor addition,” it
must meet the following criteria:
¾ The addition does not increase the number of dwelling units of the existing building or
structure.
¾ The addition does not include a basement, regardless if the existing building or structure
has a basement, within flood and shoreline erosion hazards.
¾ Existing residential uses:
a) Ground floor additions: The ground floor addition is 50% or less (30% for
shoreline erosion hazards) of the original habitable ground floor area* to a
maximum footprint of 100 square metres, or in the case of multiple additions, all
additions combined are equal to or less than 50% (30% for shoreline erosion
hazards) of the original habitable ground floor area* to a maximum footprint of
100 square metres., OR
89
b) An additional storey: The additional storey does not exceed the original
habitable ground floor area*.
¾ Existing commercial and industrial uses:
The addition is 50% or less (30% for shoreline erosion hazards) of the original ground
floor area*, or in the case of multiple additions, all additions combined are equal to or
less than 50% (30% for shoreline erosion hazards) of the original ground floor area*.
¾ Subsequent requests for additions that will result in the cumulative exceedance of the
maximum permitted allowance, as based on the original ground floor area, will not be
permitted.
* Please Note: the term “original ground floor area” or “original habitable ground floor
area” refers to that ground floor area which existed on November 16, 1990, the date that
the Authority’s Regulation 164 R.R.O. 1990 came into force.
Natural heritage features and areas: means features and areas, including significant wetlands,
fish habitat, significant woodlands, significant valleylands, significant habitat of endangered
species and threatened species, significant wildlife habitat, and significant areas of natural and
scientific interest, which are important for their environmental and social values as a legacy of
the natural landscapes of an area. (PPS, 2005)
Natural heritage system: means a system made up of natural features and areas, linked by
natural corridors which are necessary to maintain biological and geological diversity, natural
functions, viable populations of indigenous species and ecosystems. These systems can include
lands that have been restored and areas with the potential to be restored to a natural state. (PPS,
2005)
Negative impacts: means: a) in regard to water, degradation to the quality and quantity of water,
sensitive surface water features and sensitive ground water features, and their related hydrologic
functions, due to a single, multiple or successive development or site alteration activities; b) in
regard to fish habitat, the harmful alteration, disruption or destruction of fish habitat, except
where, in conjunction with the appropriate agencies, it has been authorized under the Fisheries
Act, using the guiding principles of no-net-loss of productive capacity; and c) in regard to other
natural features and areas, degradation that threatens the health and integrity of the natural
features or ecological functions for which an area is identified due to single, multiple or
successive development or site alteration activities. (PPS, 2005)
Other wetlands: means any wetland that that is not a provincially-significant wetland.
Pollution: Any deleterious physical substance or other contaminant that has the potential to be
generated by development in an area to which a regulation made under clause (1) (c) applies
(Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act)
Pond, bypass: Bypass ponds are located outside the channel of a watercourse and are created by
diverting some of the flow of water from a watercourse into an adjacent pond. The outlet from
these ponds usually returns water from the pond to the watercourse.
90
Pond, off-line or isolated pond: An off-line pond is located outside, or beyond, the channel of a
watercourse, where the boundary of the watercourse is defined as the high water mark, as
defined by the NVCA.
Pond, on-line: An on-line pond is created within the defined channel of a watercourse by way of
a dam or other man-made means.
Quality and quantity of water: is measured by indicators such as minimum base flow, depth to
water table, aquifer pressure, oxygen levels, suspended solids, temperature, bacteria, nutrients
and hazardous contaminants, and hydrologic regime. (PPS, 2005)
Reconstruction: means the restoration, repair or replacement of a building or structure within its
original footprint, not to exceed its original ground floor area, gross floor area or height, and
without any change to its original use. ‘Reconstructed’ has a corresponding meaning.
Redevelopment: means the creation of new units, uses or lots on previously developed land in
existing communities, including brownfield sites. (PPS 2005)
Retaining wall: A vertical structure designed to resist the lateral pressure of soil and water
behind it.
Revetment: A vertical or inclined facing of rip-rap or other material protecting a soil surface
from erosion.
Riprap: A layer of stone to prevent the erosion of soil.
Rubble: Waste fragments of stone, brick, etc. from old houses; pieces of undressed stone used
especially as filling-in for walls; loose angular stones as covering of some rocks; water-worn
stones.
Scour: Local lowering of a stream bed by the erosive action of flowing water.
Sedimentation: The deposition of detached soil particles.
Sensitive: as it pertains to surface water features and ground water features, means areas that are
particularly susceptible to impacts from activities or events including, but not limited to, water
withdrawals, and additions of pollutants. (PPS, 2005)
Significant: means:
a) in regard to wetlands, coastal wetlands and areas of natural and scientific interest, an
area identified as provincially-significant by the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources
using evaluation procedures established by the province, as amended from time to time;
b) in regard to the habitat of endangered species and threatened species, means the
habitat, as approved by the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, that is necessary for
the maintenance, survival, and/or the recovery of naturally occurring or reintroduced
populations of endangered species or threatened species, and where those areas of
91
occurrence are occupied or habitually occupied by the species during all or any part(s) of
its life cycle;
c) in regard to woodlands, an area which is ecologically important in terms of features
such as species composition age of trees and stand history; functionally important due to
its contribution to the broader landscape because of its location, size or due to the amount
of forest cover in the planning area, or economically important due to site quality, species
composition, or past management history; and
d) in regard to wildlife habitat and valleylands, ecologically important in terms of
features, functions, representation or amount, and contributing to the quality and diversity
of an identifiable geographic area or natural heritage system. (PPS, 2005)
Site alteration: means activities, such as grading, excavation and the placement of fill that
would change the landform and natural vegetative characteristics of a site. (PPS, 2005)
Special Policy Area: means an area within a community that has historically existed in the
floodplain and where site-specific policies, approved by both the Ministers of Natural Resources
and Municipal Affairs and Housing, are intended to provide for the continued viability of
existing uses (which are generally on a small scale) and address the significant social and
economic hardships to the community that would result from strict adherence to provincial
policies concerning development. The criteria and procedures for approval are established by the
province.
A special policy area is not intended to allow for new or intensified development and site
alteration, if a community has feasible opportunities for development outside the floodplain.
(PPS, 2005)
Still water line: the 100-year peak or flood level with a one chance in one hundred of occurring
in any given year, without the influences of wave uprush, seche, ship-generated waves, ice-piling
or other water-related hazards
Story: the portion of a building,
(a) that is situated between the top of any floor and the top of the floor next above it, or
(b) that is situated between the top of the floor and the ceiling above the floor, if there is
no floor above it.
Surficial erosion: the physical removal, detachment and movement of soil at the ground surface
due to water or wind
Top-of-bank: The point at which the slope of a valley or shoreline meets the horizontal plain of
the adjacent table-land.
Valleyland: means land that has depressional features associated with a river or stream, whether
or not it contains a watercourse.
Watercourse: an identifiable depression in the ground in which a flow of water regularly or
continuously occurs.
92
Watershed: an area that is drained by a river and its tributaries (PPS, 2005)
Wetland: means land that a) is seasonally or permanently covered by shallow water or has a
water table close to or at its surface, b) directly contributes to the hydrological function of a
watershed through connection with a surface watercourse, c) has hydric soils, the formation of
which has been caused by the presence of abundant water, and d) has vegetation dominated by
hydrophytic plants or water tolerant plants, the dominance of which has been favoured by the
presence of abundant water, but does not include periodically soaked or wet land that is used for
agricultural purposes and no longer exhibits a wetland characteristic referred to in clause c) or d)
Woodland: means treed areas that provide environmental and economic benefits to both the
private landowner and the general public, such as erosion prevention, hydrological and nutrient
cycling, provision of clean air and the long-term storage of carbon, provision of wildlife habitat,
outdoor recreational opportunities, and the sustainable harvest of a wide range of woodland
products. Woodlands include treed areas, woodlots or forested areas and can vary in their level
of significance at the local, regional and provincial levels. (PPS, 2005)
Please note: additional definitions may be found in the MNR’s Natural Hazards and Natural
Heritage Technical Guidelines, and in the Provincial Policy Statement
93
7.0
References and Web Links
References
Stream Corridors Project Management Team. (2001). Adaptive Management of Stream
Corridors in Ontario.9
Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) and Conservation Ontario. (2005). Guidelines for
Developing Schedules of Regulated Areas.10
MNR. (2002a). River and Stream Systems: Flooding Hazard Limit Technical Guide.9
MNR (2002b). River and Stream Systems: Erosion Hazard Limit Technical Guide.9
MNR. (2001). Understanding Natural Hazards.9
MNR (1996a). Hazardous Sites Technical Guide.9 11
MNR (1996b). Technical Guide for Great Lakes – St. Lawrence River System.11
MNR (1996c). Technical Guide for Large Inland Lakes. 11
MNR. (1993a). Ontario Wetland Evaluation System: Northern Manual.
MNR. (1993b). Ontario Wetland Evaluation System: Southern Manual.
MNR. (1987). Guidelines for Developing Great Lakes Shoreline Management Plans.
Prent & J. Parish. (2001). Belt Width Delineation Procedures
Terraprobe Limited and Aqua Solutions (for MNR). (1998). Geotechnical Principles for Stable
Slope, Great Lakes – St. Lawrence River System: Physical features and Processes, part #1 pp 3849.11
Web Links
Conservation Ontario: www.conservationontario.ca
The Institute for Watershed Science – Trent University
All conservation authorities have a three disc set of the following documents (provided in 2007):
“Adaptive Management in Ontario – Natural Hazards Technical Guides” (MNR and Watershed
Science Centre, 2002) and the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River System and Large Inland Lakes:
Technical Guides (Watershed Science Centre and MNR, 2001). They are available to purchase
through the Institute of Watershed Science – Trent University. http://www.trentu.ca/iws/
Provincial Legislation and Regulations (Conservation Authorities Act.):www.e-laws.gov.on.ca
Provincial Policy Statement: http://www.mah.gov.on.ca/Page215.aspx
9
Available within the MNR and Watershed Science Centre (2002) disk Adaptive Management of Stream
Corridors in Ontario including Natural Hazards Technical Guide.
10
Available on the Conservation Ontario, Members page under “Policy and Planning; Section 28
Regulation; Implementation Support Material”
11
Available within the Watershed Science Centre and MNR (2001) disk Great Lakes – St. Lawrence River
System and Large Inland Lakes: Technical Guides for flooding, erosion, and dynamic beaches is support of
natural hazards policies 3.1 of the Provincial Policy Statement.
94
Appendices
Planning and Regulation Guidelines
August 28, 2009
95
List of Appendices
Appendix 1
Understanding
Appendix 2
c)
Simcoe County MOU
d)
Streamlining of Consent Applications
Appendix 3
Appendix 4
Appendix 5
Pond Policy
Appendix 6
Appendix 7
Two Zone and Special Policy Areas Floodplain Management
Approaches
Appendix 8
Interpretation of Clause 2(1)(d) and Clause 2(1)(e) (Great Lakes
Shoreline) in Conservation Authorities Regulations
*Please note: the following additional information is located in the
Appendix of Conservation Ontario’s Guidelines to Support
Conservation Authority Administration of the “Development,
Interference with Wetlands and Alteration to Shorelines and
Watercourses Regulations.”
•
•
•
•
Conservation Authorities Act, Section 28
Ontario Regulation 97/04
Conservation Authorities Act Section 28(3) Hearing
Guidelines
Synopsis of Interpretations of Conservation of Land
96
Appendix 1
Understanding
97
CONSERVATION ONTARIO,
MINISTRY OF NATURAL RESOURCES &
MINISTRY OF MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS AND HOUSING
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING ON PROCEDURES TO
ADDRESS CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
DELEGATED RESPONSIBILITY
PURPOSE OF THE MOU
The MOU defines the roles and relationships between Conservation Authorities (CAs),
the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR), and the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and
Housing (MMAH) in planning for implementation of CA delegated responsibilities under
the Provincial One Window Planning System.
BENEFITS TO SIGNATORY PARTIES
It is beneficial for all parties to enter into this agreement because it clarifies the roles of
CAs and the unique status of CAs in relationship to the Provincial One Window
Planning System.
DELEGATED RESPONSIBILITY FOR NATURAL HAZARDS
CAs were delegated natural hazard responsibilities by the Minister of Natural
Resources. A copy of the delegation letter is attached. This letter (dated April 1995)
went to all CAs and summarizes delegations from the MNR including flood plain
management, hazardous slopes, Great Lakes shorelines, unstable soils and erosion
which are now encompassed by Section 3.1 “Natural Hazards” of the Provincial Policy
Statement (1997). In this delegated role, the CA is responsible for representing the
“Provincial Interest” on these matters in planning exercises where the Province is not
involved.
This role does not extend to other portions of the PPS unless specifically delegated or
assigned in writing by the Province.
98
ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
Ministry of Natural Resources
a) MNR retains the provincial responsibility for the development of flood, erosion and
hazard land management policies, programs and standards on behalf of the province
pursuant to the Ministry of Natural Resources Act.
b) Where no conservation authorities exist, MNR provides technical support to the
Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing on matters related to Section 3.1 of the
Provincial Policy Statement in accordance with the “Protocol Framework – One Window
Plan Input, Review and Appeals”.
c) MNR, in conjunction with MMAH, co-ordinates the provincial review of applications
for Special Policy Area approval under Section 3.1 of the PPS.
Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing
a) MMAH coordinates provincial input, review and approval of policy documents, and
development proposals and appeals to the Ontario Municipal Board in accordance with
the “Protocol Framework One Window Plan Input Review and Appeals”.
b) Where appropriate, MMAH will consult conservation authorities as part of its review
of policy documents and development proposals to seek input on whether there was
“regard to” Section 3.1 of the PPS.
c) Where there may be a potential conflict regarding a Conservation Authority’s
comments on a planning application with respect to Section 3.1 of the PPS and
comments from provincial ministries regarding other Sections of the PPS, the Ministry of
Municipal Affairs and Housing will facilitate discussions amongst the affected ministries
and the Conservation Authority so that a single integrated position can be reached.
d) Where appropriate, MMAH will initiate or support appeals to the OMB on planning
matters where there is an issue as to whether there was “regard to” Section 3.1 of the
PPS.
e) MMAH, in conjunction with MNR, coordinates the provincial review of application for
Special Policy Area approval under Section 3.1 of the PPS.
99
Conservation Authorities (CAs)
a) The CAs will review policy documents and development proposals processed under
the Planning Act to ensure that the application has appropriate regard to Section 3.1 of
the PPS.
b) Upon request from MMAH, CAs will provide comments directly to MMAH on planning
matters related to Section 3.1 of the PPS as part of the provincial one window review
process.
c) Where there may be a potential conflict regarding a Conservation Authority’s
comments on a planning application with respect to Section 3.1 of the PPS and
comments from provincial ministries regarding other Sections of the PPS, the Ministry of
Municipal Affairs and Housing will facilitate discussions amongst the affected ministries
and the Conservation Authority so that a single integrated position can be reached.
d) CAs will apprise MMAH of planning matters where there is an issue as to whether
there has been “regard to” Section 3.1 of the PPS to determine whether or not direct
involvement by the province is required.
e) Where appropriate, CAs will initiate an appeal to the OMB to address planning
matters where there is an issue as to whether there has been “regard to” Section 3.1 of
the PPS is at issue. CAs may request MMAH to support the appeal.
f) CAs will participate in provincial review of applications for Special Policy Area
approval.
g) CAs will work with MMAH, to develop screening and streamlining procedures that
eliminate unnecessary delays and duplication of effort.
100
FURTHER CA ROLES IN PLAN INPUT, PLAN REVIEW AND APPEALS
CAs also undertake further roles in planning under which they may provide plan input or
plan review comments or make appeals.
1. Watershed Based Resource Management Agency
CAs are corporate bodies created by the province at the request of two or more
municipalities in accordance with the requirements of the Conservation Authorities Act
(CA Act). Section 20 of the CA Act provides the mandate for an Authority to offer a
broad resources management program. Section 21 of the CA Act provides the mandate
to have watershed-based resource management programs and/or policies that are
approved by the Board of Directors.
CAs operating under the authority of the CA Act, and in conjunction with municipalities,
develop business plans, watershed plans and natural resource management plans
within their jurisdictions (watersheds). These plans may recommend specific
approaches to land use and resource planning and management that should be
incorporated into municipal planning documents and related development applications
in order to be implemented. CAs may become involved in the review of municipal
planning documents (e.g., Official Plans (OPs), zoning by-laws) and development
applications under the Planning Act to ensure that program interests developed and
defined under Section 20 and 21 of the CA Act are addressed in land use decisions
made by municipal planning authorities. In this role, the CA is responsible to represent
its program and policy interests as a watershed–based resource management agency.
2. Planning Advisory Service to Municipalities
The provision of planning advisory services to municipalities is implemented through a
service agreement with participating municipalities or as part of a CAs approved
program activity (i.e., service provided through existing levy). Under a service
agreement, a Board-approved fee schedule is used and these fee schedules are
coordinated between CAs that “share” a participating municipality. The “Policies and
Procedures for the Charging of CA Fees” (MNR, June 13, 1997) identifies “plan review”
activities as being eligible for charging CA administrative fees.
The CA is essentially set up as a technical advisor to municipalities. The agreements
cover the Authority’s areas of technical expertise, e.g., natural hazards and other
resource management programs. The provision of planning advisory services for the
review of Planning Act applications is a means of implementing a comprehensive
resource management program on a watershed basis.
In this role, the CA is responsible to provide advice on the interpretation of the
Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) under the terms of its planning advisory service
agreement with the municipality. Beyond those for Section 3.1 “Natural Hazards” where
101
CAs have delegated responsibility, these comments should not be construed by any
party as representing the provincial position.
3. CAs as Landowner
CAs are landowners and as such, may become involved in the planning process as a
proponent or adjacent landowner. Planning Service Agreements with municipalities
have anticipated that this may lead to a conflict with our advisory role and this is
addressed by establishing a mechanism for either party to identify a conflict and
implement an alternative review mechanism.
4. Regulatory Responsibilities
a) CA Act Regulations
In participating in the review of development applications under the Planning Act, CAs
will (i) ensure that the applicant and municipal planning authority are aware of the
Section 28 regulations and requirements under the CA Act, and, (ii) assist in the
coordination of applications under the Planning Act and the CA Act to eliminate
unnecessary delay or duplication in the process.
b) Other Delegated or Assigned Regulatory/Approval Responsibility
Federal and provincial ministries and municipalities often enter agreements to transfer
regulatory/approval responsibilities to individual CAs (e.g., Section 35 Fisheries
Act/DFO; Ontario Building Code/septic tank approvals). In carrying out these
responsibilities and in participating in the review of development applications under the
Planning Act, CAs will (i) ensure that the applicant and municipality are aware of the
requirements under these other pieces of legislation and how they may affect the
application; and, (ii) assist in the coordination of applications under the Planning Act and
those other Acts to eliminate unnecessary delays or duplication in the process.
CANCELLATION OR REVIEW OF THE MOU
The terms and conditions of this MOU can be cancelled within 90 days upon written
notice from any of the signing parties. In any event, this document should be reviewed
at least once every two years to assess its effectiveness, its relevance and its
appropriateness in the context the needs of the affected parties. “Ed. Note: 90 days is to
provide time for the parties to reach a resolution other than cancellation”.
102
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING ON PROCEDURES TO ADDRESS
CONSERVATION AUTHORITY DELEGATED RESPONSIBILITY
I hereby agree to support the provisions contained in this Memorandum of
Understanding as an appropriate statement of the roles and responsibilities of relevant
Ministries and Conservation Authorities in the implementation of the Provincial Policy
Statement.
Jan 19, 2001: Original signed by
________________________
David de Launay
Director
Lands and Waters Branch
Ministry of Natural Resources
__________________
Date
Feb 12, 2001: Original signed by
______________________
___________________
Audrey Bennett
Date
A/Director
Provincial Planning and Environmental Services Branch
Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing
Jan 01, 2001: Original signed by
______________________
R.D. Hunter
General Manager
Conservation Ontario
__________________
Date
103
Appendix 2
a) Simcoe County MOU Regarding Land Use
Planning
b) Streamlining of Consent Applications
104
Appendix 2 a
Memorandum of Understanding with Simcoe County
Regarding Land Use Planning
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
Appendix 2 b
Agreement for Streamlining of Consent and Minor Variance
Applications
114
115
116
117
118
Appendix 3
119
Oak Ridges Moraine
Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority Permit
Implementation Guidelines
November 2003
120
1. INTRODUCTION
The Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP) provides land-use and resource
management planning direction on how to protect the ecological and hydrological features and
functions on the Oak Ridges Moraine. Protecting and managing the health, diversity, size and
connectivity of Key Natural Heritage Features as well as the hydrologically sensitive features is
critical to the ecological and hydrological integrity of the ORM.
All municipalities and agencies must implement the ORMCP through the provincial planning
process. Municipalities have the ultimate responsibility to ensure planning applications conform
to the ORMCP. The Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority (NVCA) will assist
municipalities with the review of Natural Heritage Evaluations or Hydrological Evaluations to
ensure they meet ORMCP requirements.
Conservation Authorities on the Oak Ridges Moraine (ORM) have also agreed to use their best
efforts to implement the ORMCP through the permitting process under their regulations.
This approach was confirmed by NVCA’s Executive Committee on June 28, 2002 stating, “that
staff be directed to administer all Conservation Authority permit applications for lands on the
Oak Ridges Moraine in conformity with the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan”.
Purpose
The purpose of these guidelines is to assist staff in the implementation of the ORMCP through
NVCA’s permits that are not associated with a current Planning Act Application. Any permit
that is associated with such an application will benefit from the studies required for the planning
application.
2. ORMCP POLICIES
The propose of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan is to provide land use and resource
management planning direction to provincial ministries and agencies and other stakeholders on
how to protect the Moraine’s ecological and hydrological features and functions.
The Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Act (Bill 122) was passed in the Ontario Legislature and
received Royal Assent on December 14, 2001. On April 22, 2002 the Oak Ridges Moraine
Conservation Plan (ORMCP) was approved and filed as a Minister's regulation O. Reg. 140/02.
It is deemed to be in effect as of November 17, 2001. All decisions on planning and development
applications under the Planning and Condominium Acts that commenced from that date forward
must conform to the ORMCP.
Land Use Designations
The ORMCP has four land use designations. The most restrictive are identified as Natural Core
Area (NCA) 38% and Natural Linkage Area (NLA) - 24%. These areas contain the greatest
concentration of natural features and linkages and are characterized as follows.
¾ Very limited new land uses are permitted
121
¾ Development is permitted on vacant existing lots of record that have appropriate zoning
¾ New lot creation is limited. (The maximum permitted is a cumulative total of one such
severance for each rural lot.)
A further 30% of ORM lands are designated as Countryside Areas (includes Rural Settlement
areas), which are largely identified for agricultural, rural, recreational and resource uses.
¾ New lots are permitted in the very small rural settlement areas (around Colgan and
Tottenham)
¾ In the remainder of the Countryside Area, again only one severance in total is permitted per
rural lot.
The remaining 8% of the ORM lands are designated as Settlement Areas and are restricted to
existing urban or settlement area boundaries. We do not have any settlement areas within our
watershed.
Key Natural Heritage Features and Hydrologically Sensitive Features
(See sections 22. (2) and 26. (2) of the ORMCP for the details)
Generally, no development or site alteration (including lot creation) is permitted within
Key Natural Heritage Features and Hydrologically Sensitive Features or their minimum
vegetative protection zones (VPZ), except for resource management, flood and erosion
control, transportation, utilities and low intensity recreation.
Key natural heritage features include:
• Wetlands
• Significant portions of the habitats of endangered, rare and threatened species.
• Fish Habitat.
• Areas of natural and scientific interest (life science).
• Significant valley lands.
• Significant woodlands.
• Significant wildlife habitat.
• Sand barrens, savannahs and tallgrass prairies.
Hydrologically sensitive features include:
• Permanent and intermittent streams
• Wetlands
• Kettle Lakes
• Seepage areas and springs
Development is defined in the ORMCP as: “means the creation of a new lot, a change in land
use, or the construction of buildings and structures, any of which require approval under the
Planning Act, the Environmental Assessment Act, or the Drainage Act, but does not include,
a) the construction of facilities for transportation, infrastructure and utilities as described in
section 41, by a public body, or
b) for greater certainty,
1. the reconstruction, repair or maintenance of a drain approved under the Drainage Act
and in existence on November 15, 2001, or
122
2. the carrying out of agricultural practices on land that was being used for agricultural
uses on November 15, 2001
Site Alteration is defined in the ORMCP as: “means activities such as filling, grading, and
excavation that would change the landform and natural vegetative characteristics of the land but
does not include,
a) the construction of facilities for transportation, infrastructure and utilities as described in
section 41, by a public body, or
b) for greater certainty,
1) the reconstruction, repair or maintenance of a drain approved under the Drainage Act
and in existence on November 15, 2001, or
2) the carrying out of agricultural practices on land that was being used for agricultural uses
on November 15, 2001
Previously authorized single dwellings (Section 7)
The ORMCP “grandfathers” development on an existing lot of record that is properly zoned to
permit the use, erection, or location of a single dwelling provided “the applicant demonstrates,
to the extent possible, that the use, erection and location will not adversely affect the
ecological integrity of the Plan Area”.
The following Key Natural Heritage Features and Hydrologically Sensitive Features have been
identified and mapped by the province: wetlands, ANSIs (life science), general location of RTEs,
significant woodlands and kettle lakes and permanent and intermittent streams. Staff can locate
this information on our server under Planning.
Any Planning Act application or NVCA permit application for development or site
alteration will require an assessment to determine if there are any known key Natural
Heritage Features and Hydrologically Sensitive Features on the site. No development or
site alteration will be permitted within those areas or their minimum vegetative protection
zones
Applications within a "minimum area of influence" (AOI) (usually 120m) for Key Natural
Heritage or Hydrologically Sensitive Features will require a natural heritage evaluation (NHE) or
hydrological evaluation (see section 23 and 26. (4) for the requirements).
Connectivity (see section 20)
To support connectivity, planning and permits applications must ensure that:
“Every application for development or site alteration shall identify planning, design and
construction practices that ensure no building or other site alterations impede the movement of
plants and animals among key natural heritage features, hydrologically sensitive features and
adjacent land within the Natural Core Areas and Natural Linkage Areas.
Landform Conservation Areas (section 30 for the details)
To protect the landform character and function of the moraine, two categories of landform
conservation areas have been identified and mapped. These areas are to be protected through site
plans, development strategies and evaluations for earth science ANSIs
123
An application for development or site alteration with respect to lands in conservation area
(category 1) shall identify planning, design, and construction practices that will keep disturbance
to landform character to a minimum, including,
a) maintaining significant landform features such as steep slopes, kames, kettles, ravines,
and ridges in their natural undisturbed form;
b) limiting the portion of the net developable area of the site that is disturbed to not more
than 25% of he total area of the site; and
c) limiting the portion of the net developable area of the site that has impervious surfaces to
not more that 15 percent of the total area of the site.
An application for development or site alteration with respect to lands in conservation area
(category 2) shall identify planning, design, and construction practices that will keep
disturbance to landform character to a minimum, including,
a) maintaining significant landform features such as steep slopes, kames, kettles, ravines,
and ridges in their natural undisturbed form;
b) limiting the portion of the net developable area of the site that is disturbed to not more
than 50% of he total area of the site; and
c) limiting the portion of the net developable area of the site that has impervious surfaces to
not more that 20 percent of the total area of the site.
3) SUMMARY OF NVCA PERMIT IMPLICATIONS
a) As a result of the above, any application for a permit within the ORM must assess the need for
a Natural Heritage Evaluation. The following figure outlines that process. (See the ORM
technical paper # 8 on Natural Heritage Evaluations for the details)
b) An application for a permit within the minimum area of influence of a hydrologically
sensitive feature shall be accompanied by a hydrological evaluation ( see section 26.4)
c) Wildlife corridors or “connectivity” must be maintained within the Natural Core and Linkage
areas according to Section 20 requirements.
d) The disturbances to Landform Conservation Areas (Category 1&2) shall be minimized
according to section 30 requirements.
124
125
Appendix 4
126
THE NOTTAWASAGA VALLEY CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
CONSERVATION LAND
PROTECTION
AND
ACQUISITION
POLICY
Through Ontario’s
Land Use Planning
Process
May 2002
127
366 Mill Street, ANGUS, Ontario, L0M 1B0
Voice: 705.424.1479; Fax: 705.424.2115
Web: www.nvca.on.ca
CONSERVATION LAND PROTECTION AND ACQUISITION POLICY
Through Ontario’s Land Use Planning Process
1.0
INTRODUCTION
The planning and engineering programs of the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation
Authority (NVCA) process approximately 1,000 applications yearly related to planning
and development. These applications range from policy oriented documents such as
Official Plans and Secondary Plans to spot zonings to subdivision of land proposals
including plans of subdivision and consents. Through Ontario’s land use planning
process which is legislated under the Planning Act, the NVCA reviews and provides
comments on these applications from an environmental perspective. The review and
comments are provided in conformity with the matters of provincial interest and the
provincial policy statements in accordance with section 2 and subsection 3(6) of the Act
respectively.
Often, the NVCA will identify through the planning process the various areas of
environmental constraint and significance (conservation lands) associated with a given
property. These environmental lands include areas susceptible to flooding or erosion
(constraint lands) or ecological areas such as wetlands, woodlands, and fish habitat
(significant lands). For the most part, constraint and significant lands are not suitable for
development and, as such, are earmarked for protection. This is certainly the case in
large-scale land development proposals such as plans of subdivision where significant
blocks of land could be constrained and deemed undevelopable.
It is frequent, in these cases, that the developer is willing to donate the undevelopable
lands to the municipality or the conservation authority for their protection in the long
term or perpetuity. The NVCA supports the long term protection and public ownership of
these conservation lands and, as a result, this Policy has been established to provide an
appropriate framework for their acquisition.
2.0
Background
The watershed within the Nottawasaga Valley is abundant with significant natural
landscapes and features. For example, the Niagara Escarpment, a world biosphere, is
located in the western part of the watershed while the Oak Ridges and the Oro Moraines
form part of the southern and eastern boundaries of the NVCA’s jurisdiction respectively.
Significant natural heritage features include the internationally significant Minesing
Swamp and the Pinery, an old growth forest in the Town of New Tecumseth. These
significant landform and natural heritage features together with constraint lands such as
areas susceptible to flooding and other features would be classified as “conservation
lands” for the purposes of this Policy.
128
3.0
Page 2
Purpose
The purpose of the Conservation Land Protection and Acquisition Policy (CLPAP) is to
establish a framework to guide staff of the NVCA with a basis for identifying
conservation lands for protection and for pursuing certain lands for acquisition through
the land use planning process. In particular, the purpose of this Policy is to:
⇒
⇒
⇒
⇒
⇒
Help secure significant conservation lands within the watershed in perpetuity
Increase the public ownership of conservation lands in the watershed
Foster relationships with conservation organizations for land securement
Augment the conservation land base in the watershed for research and analysis
Communicate the importance of conservation land protection and acquisition
4.0
Legislative Basis
The mandate and objective of the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority (NVCA) is
legislated under Section 20 of the Conservation Authorities Act. Section 20 of the Act
states that the objective of a conservation authority is to establish and undertake a
program designed to further the conservation, restoration, development, and
management of natural resources.
The powers of the conservation authority, under Section 21 of the Act, further allow a
conservation authority to study the watershed in order to conserve, restore, develop, and
manage natural resources. The NVCA in exercising this power approved its visionary
and guiding document in 1996, the Nottawasaga Valley Watershed Management Plan.
The goal of this Plan is to conserve natural resources within our watershed in a
cooperative, integrated manner in which the human needs are met in balance with the
need to sustain the natural environment.
The objective of the “Public Conservation Lands Management” section of the Watershed
Management Plan states that the acquisition of high priority conservation lands should
be promoted. This Policy helps fulfill this objective.
Subsection 21(1)(c) of the Conservation Authorities Act further identifies that the
conservation authority has the power to acquire by purchase, lease or otherwise any
lands it may require. This Conservation Land Protection and Acquisition Policy
exercises this power under the Act.
The Conservation Land Act provides conservation authorities with the power to require
conservation easements on private land and to place restrictive covenants registered
against the title of the lands. The requirement of the NVCA to exercise these powers will
be in conformity with this Act.
In addition, this Policy will complement the NVCA “Land Acquisition Policy” (2000) which
is currently administered by the Land Management & Stewardship Services Program.
129
5.0
Page 3
Policy
Acquisition
Through the land use planning process, the NVCA will pursue the acquisition of
conservation lands eligible for the Conservation Land Tax Incentive Program (CLTIP).
These lands, which will not result in an increased tax burden to the NVCA, will include:
3
3
3
3
3
Provincially significant wetlands
Provincially significant ANSI
Niagara Escarpment lands (Escarpment Natural Areas designation)
Habitat of endangered species
Community conservation lands
The acquisition of these lands through the land development process will occur as a
condition of development (e.g. condition of draft plan approval) and through fair and
equitable negotiations.
Other conservation lands may be acquired at the discretion and approval of the NVCA
Full Authority. These lands could include significant woodlands which would be eligible
for the Managed Forest Tax Incentive Program (MFTIP) or other lands that would further
the goals and objectives of the Watershed Management Plan.
Protection
When reviewing land use proposals, the NVCA may require the establishment of
conservation easements under the Conservation Land Act on private property for those
lands not qualifying for acquisition. The conservation easement will be in favour of the
NVCA and will be policed by staff. Other land use protection controls such as zoning will
be used where possible.
6.0
Implementation
This Policy will be implemented through the land use planning program of the NVCA.
The acquisition and protection of conservation lands will be undertaken through proper
negotiation with the developer and municipality. This Policy will not be applied where a
local municipality has a conservation land acquisition policy in effect (e.g. City of Barrie).
Where possible, this Policy will be implemented through effective integration with
regional (County) and local Official Plans.
In addition, this Policy will be implemented through the NVCA’s permit approval process
under Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act.
130
7.0
Page 4
MONITORING
The Conservation Land Protection and Acquisition Policy will be reviewed on an ongoing basis to evaluate its effectiveness. This Policy may be amended from time to time
in order to reflect changing legislation, regulations, and policies at the federal, provincial,
and municipal level. Amendments to this Policy may also occur as a result of changing
programs and procedures at the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority. Significant
changes to this Policy will only occur through the normal policy formulation process,
which includes ultimate approval from the Full NVCA Membership. Minor technical
amendments (e.g. correcting ambiguous language) may be permitted at the NVCA staff
level without the approval of the Committees and the Full NVCA Membership. A staff
report, however, will be presented to the Executive Committee for their information with
regard to any minor technical amendments.
8.0
APPROVAL
This Policy came into effect by resolution on May 10, 2002.
Chief Administrative Officer
Wayne R. Wilson
Growth and Development Advisory Committee
Barry Ward, Chair
Full Authority
Harold M. Parker, Chair
131
Appendix 5
Pond Policy
MARCH 2005
132
PONDS POLICY
(MARCH 2002, amended MARCH 2005)
1.0
INTRODUCTION
1.1
Environmental Significance of Ponds
Ponds, whether natural or artificial, have many functions. Natural ponds can provide important
habitat for aquatic life and wildlife such as fish while artificial ponds can provide water for
agriculture-related uses including livestock and irrigation. Ponds are also created to manage
storm water as a result of urbanization and development. Despite their type and function, ponds
can have both a positive and negative impact on our environment and ecosystem.
Ponds play an important role in the hydrologic cycle, providing a location for the storage and
control of water. Wildlife, both terrestrial and aquatic, require water for their existence. Ponds
provide a safe and plentiful supply of water for local species.
It has also been determined that ponds may have detrimental impacts on environmental
features. Studies have revealed that the development of ponds can affect the water levels of
groundwater, erosion and the transport and deposition of sediment within a stream system. The
later changes can affect the watercourses ability to convey flows during times of flooding.
When an existing watercourse is blocked by an artificial dam or natural structure (i.e. beaver
dam, log jam), there are associated negative impacts on the ecosystem which include flooding,
impediment to fish migration, thermal impacts and decreased water quality and modifications to
aquatic species which are influenced by changing velocities, water levels and habitats.
1.2
Cultural Significance of Ponds
In certain locations, artificial or on-line ponds have existed for many years. In some cases,
communities or settlement areas have been created around or near ponds. To some degree,
the pond was identified as the focal point of the community. Historically, ponds were used as a
source of power for mills and as power sources for small operations. Ponds have also been
created for recreational purposes. These ponds are valued by the community and are of historic
significance to the local people. There are a number of examples of culturally significant ponds
within the NVCA watershed, they include the Lake of the Clouds in the Town of the Blue
Mountains, the New Lowell pond in the Township of Clearview, the Utopia pond in the Township
of Essa, the Tottenham pond in the Town of New Tecumseth and the mill ponds in the
Community of Hornings Mills, Township of Melancthon are examples of culturally significant
ponds. In many cases, removal of the pond would have some form of negative impact on the
area from a cultural, social or environmental perspective.
The NVCA has regard for the cultural significance of ponds throughout the watershed region.
1.3
Economic Significance of Ponds
Ponds are also of economic benefit to the community and the individual property owner.
Economic benefits to a community could include the provision of water for livestock watering and
133
irrigation purposes, fire protection, generated power, flood attenuation, recreational and social
opportunities. It is also recognized that the value and associated marketability of a property may
be greater with the existence of a pond. This value is based on the aesthetic, recreational, and
associated social factors of the pond.
2.0
PURPOSE
Increasing development pressures are being experienced throughout the jurisdiction of the
Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority. These development pressures include an increase
in the number of proposals for the construction of new ponds and the modification of existing
ponds.
Recognizing that ponds have an impact on our watershed, it is imperative to manage and
monitor their effects on a cumulative basis over time. In evaluating the impacts of ponds over
time, we can determine and identify their negative impacts. Once determined, the negative
impacts of ponds can be eliminated or reduced through the establishment of improved policy,
regulations, and standards for pond development and redevelopment. The NVCA’s Healthy
Waters Program considers the impact of ponds on the health of area watercourses. This is an
ongoing monitoring project of the NVCA.
The purpose of this policy is to establish a framework that will:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
3.0
Protect water resources;
Direct pond development away from environmentally significant areas;
Prevent flooding hazards through proper pond design and redesign;
Promote the proper design, operation and maintenance of ponds
Monitor the effects of ponds in the watershed on a cumulative basis;
Promote the consistent review of applications for pond development;
Communicate and educate the general public on proper pond development;
Clarify the landowners responsibility regarding pond maintenance and restoration; in
order to ensure human safety and protect properties located downstream of a pond; and
Establish a policy framework for the re-establishment of on-line ponds.
Property Owner’s Responsibilities
Property owners considering the construction of a pond on their property should be aware of
their legal responsibilities:
•
To obtain all necessary approvals for the construction of the pond and for any
subsequent modifications to the structure;
•
A dam constructed in association with a pond must be managed from the time that it is
built until it is decommissioned. Dam owners are liable for the water stored behind a
dam and any damages caused by it. Therefore, the proper operation, maintenance,
repair and rehabilitation of a dam are essential in preventing the failure of the structure.
To ensure the proper operation and maintenance of a dam, it is recommended that periodic
inspections of all dams be undertaken. Since most landowners do not possess the expertise to
undertake these works, it is recommended that a dam owner hire a qualified engineer to
134
prepare detailed construction designs for new structures, undertake inspections and to evaluate
and supervise any necessary corrective measures which may be required.
It is not intent of this policy to oversee the safe operation and maintenance of dams, which are
associated with a pond. This is the sole responsibility of the property owner. In this regard, it
is recommended that property owners consult the Canadian Dam Association:
The Canadian Dam Association
P.O. Box 4490
South Edmonton Postal Station
Edmonton, Alberta.
T6E 4X7
Telephone (780) 432-7236
4.0
LEGISLATIVE, REGULATORY, AND POLICY BASIS
4.1
Legislative Basis
The mandate and objective of the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority (NVCA) is
legislated under Section 20 of the Conservation Authorities Act. Section 20 of the Act states
that the objective of a conservation authority is to establish and undertake a program designed
to further the conservation, restoration, development, and management of natural resources.
The powers of the conservation authority, under Section 21 of the Act, further allow a
conservation authority to study the watershed in order to conserve, restore, develop, and
manage natural resources. The NVCA in exercising this power approved its visionary and
guiding document in 1996, the Nottawasaga Valley Watershed Management Plan. The goal of
this Plan is to conserve natural resources within our watershed in a cooperative, integrated
manner in which the human needs are met in balance with the need to sustain the natural
environment.
4.2
Regulatory Basis
4.2.1
Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority Fill, Construction and Alteration to
Waterways Regulation (Ontario Regulation 164 R.R.O. 1990)
Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act allows for the establishment of regulations. This
Section of the Act provides a framework in which the NVCA can regulate various works within
scheduled and regulated areas, through a permitting process.
Pursuant to Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act, the Nottawasaga Valley
Conservation Authority, through an Order in Council has established a Fill, Construction and
Alteration to Waterways Regulation (Ontario Regulation 164 R.R.O. 1990).
In accordance with Ontario Regulation 164 R.R.O. 1990, permission is required from the NVCA
for:
•
Undertaking any construction activity in or on a pond or swamp or in any area
susceptible to flooding during a regional storm;
135
•
•
Placing or dumping of fill or the alteration of existing grades either permanently or
temporarily; and
Straightening, changing, diverting or interfering with the existing channel of a river creek,
stream, watercourse or wetland.
A permit is also required from the NVCA, to undertake work on an existing pond.
4.2.2
Areas Not Subject to the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority Fill,
Construction and Alteration to Waterways Regulation (Ontario Regulation 164
R.R.O. 1990)
For areas of the NVCA watershed, which are not subject to the Authority’s Fill, Construction and
Alteration to Waterways Regulation, a letter of authorization will be issued for the construction of
new offline or dugout ponds or modifications to existing offline or dugout ponds.
4.2.3
Procedure to Obtain Permission to Construct a New Pond or Undertake Work on
an Existing Pond
Prior to the commencement of any work, an application for Permission to Undertake Work
must be submitted to the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority, and the landowner must
be in receipt of a permit from the NVCA.
Applications for Permission to Undertake Work must be accompanied by details of the
proposed work. Applications are available from the administrative office for the Nottawasaga
Valley Conservation Authority, or they can be downloaded from the NVCA website
(www.nvca.on.ca).
4.2.4
Pending Changes in the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority’s Fill,
Construction and Alteration to Waterways
Recent provincial initiatives to streamline the regulatory framework will result in changes to
Section 28 Regulations, made pursuant to the Conservation Authorities Act. Traditionally,
Section 28 Regulations described regulated activities in terms of fill, construction and alteration
to waterways. These regulated activities will be phrased in terms of development and
interference with wetlands and watercourses. The new regulation to be adopted by all
Conservation Authorities will be generic in nature.
4.3
Other Applicable Legislation
Approval of an application to construct a pond or make repairs to an existing structure by the
Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority does not exempt an applicant from any other
approvals required by legislation administered by other agencies.
Agencies that may have parallel jurisdiction include:
136
Level of
Regulatory
Approval:
Federal
Agency:
Department of
Fisheries and
Oceans Canada
Legislation:
Fisheries Act
Type of Work:
•
•
Federal
Provincial
Canada Coast
Guard/Transport
Canada
Ministry of Natural
Resources
Work within a watercourse that would
have an impact on the movement of
fish or
Work in or adjacent to a watercourse
which would result in the alteration of
fish habitat
Navigable
Waters
Protection Act
•
Decommissioning of on-line ponds
and dams on navigable waterways
Lakes and Rivers
Improvement Act
•
Work Permit -- Dams (includes the
construction, reconstruction, repair,
decommissioning or removal);
Construct or repair of ponds (by-pass
ponds, instream ponds);
•
Ministry of Natural
Resources
Ministry of the
Environment
Aggregate Resources
Act
Ontario Water
Resources Act
•
Rehabilitation Plan
•
Permit to Take Water – Regulates
water taking operations (>50,000
litres per day) from watercourses and
groundwater sources. Ponds taking
50,000 litres of water or more per day
must obtain a Permit to Take Water.
Provincial
Ministry of the
Environment
Environmental
Protection Act
•
Certificate of Approval --Prohibits
the discharge of contaminates
(including sediment) into the
environment in excess of regulatory
established limits.
Provincial
Ministry of the
Environment
Ontario Water
Resources Act
•
Certificate of Approval – for the
application of chemicals to a pond
Provincial
Niagara
Escarpment
Commission
Ministry of
Municipal Affair
and Housing
Niagara Escarpment
Planning and
Development Act
Oak Ridges Moraine
Conservation Act
•
Development Permit
•
Legislation developed at provincial
level
Municipality
Oak Ridges Moraine
Conservation Plan
(ORMCP)
Provincial
Provincial
Provincial
Local
• Municipalities must ensure
planning applications conform to
the ORMCP
The NVCA administers all applications for
lands on the Oak Ridges Moraine in
conformity with the ORMCP
Local
Municipality
Municipal Act
•
Grading and Site Alteration By-law,
etc.
137
The federal government of Canada, through the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO),
has the constitutional responsibility for seacoast and inland fisheries and the habitats supporting
them. Several provisions of the federal Fisheries Act provide for the conservation and
protection of fish habitat. In particular, Section 35(1) of the Act prohibits the harmful disruption
or destruction of fish habitat (referred to as a HADD) in Canadian Fisheries Waters, unless
authorized by the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans. This authorization usually occurs with
appropriate terms and conditions.
The Nottawasaga Valley Conservation has a Level II Agreement with the Department of
Fisheries and Oceans Canada, to review applications and determine if the proposed work will
have an impact on fish or fisheries habitat. Applications for the construction of a new pond or
work on an existing pond which would result in the harmful alteration, disruption or destruction
of fisheries habitat (HADD) will be forwarded to the Department of Fisheries and Oceans for
their review under Section 35 of the federal Fisheries Act.
4.3.1
Circulation and Consultation with Other Agencies
The Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority will consult with other agencies as needed to
ensure integration with the mandates of the other agencies.
4.4
Policy Basis
By resolution dated March 10, 2000, the Full Membership of the NVCA directed staff of the Land
Use Planning program to implement the Natural Hazard land policies (3.1) of the Provincial
Policy Statement (PPS), which was issued in 1997 under the Planning Act. The resolution also
identified that the Natural Hazards Training Manual (January 1997) should also be used when
processing planning, development, or site alteration applications. While it is recognized that the
PPS typically applies to land use planning applications under the Planning Act, the NVCA
believes that provincial policy should be applied or considered for all proposals, regardless of
application type or origin. This approach, we believe, is in keeping with the provincial interest
and the broader public interest.
Other applicable policies under the Provincial Policy Statement include the Natural Heritage
policies (2.3) and the Water Quality and Quantity policies (2.4).
5.0
POLICY
5.1
New Ponds
5.1.1
General Development Policies
When reviewing applications for new ponds, the following policies shall apply:
•
The proposed benefits of the pond must outweigh the detrimental effects;
•
Other municipal, provincial, and federal interests must be considered;
•
Aspects of common law drainage and riparian rights must be considered;
•
The need for the pond must be fully justified and rationalized;
•
Large unlined ponds to be used solely for aesthetic purposes shall be discouraged;
•
Safety measures should meet current engineering standards for ponds and dams in
Ontario;
•
Ponds for the sole purpose of fill requirements will be strongly discouraged.
138
•
The source of water for ponds shall not be fed through dug or drilled wells
5.1.2
Prohibitive Policies
New ponds will be prohibited in the following areas:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Within the existing channel of a watercourse (in-stream pond or on-line pond);
Within significant fish habitat;
Within provincially significant and all classified (Class 4-7) wetlands;
Within the erosion hazard limit;
Within the floodway of a river or stream system;
Within the meander belt of river and stream systems;
Within key natural heritage areas or hydrologically sensitive areas as identified in the
Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan or other applicable technical studies i.e. South
Simcoe Groundwater Study.
5.1.3
Restrictive Policies
In general, new ponds will be directed away from the following:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
All other wetlands;
Significant valley lands;
Significant habitat of threatened and endangered species;
Significant woodlands;
Significant wildlife areas;
Significant areas of natural and scientific interest (ANSI);
Significant riparian areas (the area within 30 metres from a watercourse);
Significant recharge/discharge, and headwater areas;
Environmentally significant areas (ESA);
Other natural heritage features identified through subwatershed plans, etc;
Natural hazard lands such as steep slopes and flood prone lands;
Existing structures, sewage disposal systems, and point sources of pollution.
Ponds may be permitted in the areas identified under Section 5.1.3, provided that it can be
demonstrated that there will be no negative impact on:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Natural heritage features;
The function of the natural heritage feature;
The function of the flood prone area;
The quality and quantity of ground water;
The quality and quantity of surface water; and
Riparian rights of other landowners.
It is the responsibility of an applicant to demonstrate that “no negative impact” would result from
the proposed work. Following a preliminary review of an application by staff of the Nottawasaga
Valley Conservation Authority, the applicant will be advised which of the following studies and
reports would be required to demonstrate their proposal will have no negative impact:
•
An Environmental Impact Study;
139
•
•
•
•
•
•
A Flood Plain Analysis;
A Soils Report or Slope Stability Analysis;
A Hydrogeologic Report;
A fluvial geomorphology study;
A professional engineered design;
Or other reports deemed necessary by staff of the NVCA.
The costs associated with the preparation of the necessary studies and reports shall be the
responsibility of the applicant.
All studies and reports must be prepared and certified by a qualified professional to the
satisfaction of the NVCA.
In general, by-pass ponds shall be discouraged. However, by-pass ponds may be permitted if it
can be demonstrated that there will be no negative impact and that there will be an overall
environmental benefit resulting from the work.
5.2
Existing Ponds
5.2.1
General Redevelopment Policies
The issuance of a permit under the Conservation Authorities Act for the expansion or
maintenance of an existing pond will be subject to the following general policies:
•
•
•
•
The proposed benefits of the works must outweigh the detrimental effects;
Other municipal, provincial, and federal interests must be considered;
Aspects of common law drainage and riparian rights must be considered; and
Structurally unsafe ponds will be redesigned to current safe standards.
The Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority shall strongly discourage landowners, who
wish to expand an existing on-line pond.
5.2.2
On-Line Ponds that Fail
Existing ponds that fail may be permitted to be re-instated provided a permit is obtained from
the NVCA as well as all other appropriate agencies which are listed in Section 4.3 of this policy.
Technical engineering and environmental studies may be required to demonstrate that the
proposed works on the pond are in accordance with the NVCA’s General Redevelopment
Policies listed in Section 5.1.1 of this Policy, prior to the issuance of a permit under the
Conservation Authorities Act.
5.2.3
Provision for Emergency Repairs
There is a consideration for a landowner to undertake temporary emergency repairs to a pond
that fails in order to prevent further damage. The property owner is responsible for contacting
the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority as well as all other appropriate approval
agencies as soon as the failure of a pond is observed. If the landowner is unable to contact the
agencies listed above due to the time of day or because this agency is closed, the landowner
shall contact these agencies on the next business day to report the failure.
140
5.2.4
Environmental Restoration
Where possible, the following restoration techniques will be implemented through the permit
approval process and through the land use planning process as a condition of approval or as a
prerequisite to development:
•
•
•
•
•
•
The planting of trees on the subject property or in the same catchment area;
The stabilization of the existing stream bank through bioengineering and engineering
methods;
The removal of fish barriers to create fish passage;
The redesign of the existing pond to improve the aquatic ecosystem;
The installation of bottom draw outlet structures to reduce thermal impacts; and
The conversion of existing on-line ponds into off-line ponds.
5.3
Pond Maintenance
It is the responsibility of the landowner to maintain their ponds in accordance with all appropriate
legislation and the soon to be approved Canadian Dam Safety Standards. A permit from the
NVCA is required for any in-water works such as dredging or dam repairs.
6.0
IMPLEMENTATION
The Ponds Policy will be primarily implemented through the NVCA’s land use planning program.
As a result, this Policy will be applied to any land use planning proposal under the Planning Act,
such as site plan and subdivision applications. The NVCA shall encourage its member
municipalities to incorporate this policy into municipal planning documents such as Official Plans
and implementing Zoning By-Laws.
This Policy will also be implemented, as part of the planning program, through the provisions
(Sections 20, 21) and regulations (Section 28) under the Conservation Authorities Act. The
NVCA’s permit approval process is integral to the success of implementing this Policy.
Through the implementation and administration of site alteration and fill by-laws under the
Municipal Act, the NVCA assists its member municipalities such as the Townships of
Melancthon and Clearview with the implementation of these by-laws and the construction of
ponds as designated officers. Municipal fill by-laws complement the work of the NVCA’s Ponds
Policy in that the construction of a pond and the expansion of an existing pond involve the
alteration of existing grades.
Other program areas within the NVCA, such as “Healthy Waters Program”, will also have regard
to this Policy when implementing their projects.
7.0
INTERPRETATION
Dam
A structure constructed as a barrier across a river, lake, pond or stream or areas subject to flow
which originate from either surface or subsurface flows, high water areas to hold back water in
order to raise its level, create a reservoir or divert the flow of water.
141
Environmentally Significant Areas (ESA)
ESA will be defined by the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority and other stakeholders
through a public consultative process. Significant areas are ecologically important in terms of
their features, function, representation or amount and contributing to the quality and diversity of
an identifiable geographic area or natural heritage system. Criteria for determining significance
may be recommended by the Province and the local municipality.
Erosion Hazard Limit
Erosion hazards mean the loss of land, due to human or natural processes, that pose a threat to
life and property. The Erosion Hazard Limit is determined using the 100-year erosion rate (the
average annual rate of recession extended over a hundred year time span) and includes toe
erosion, slope stability and access during emergencies. The erosion hazard limit will depend on
whether the watercourse flows through a well defined valley system and is confined within a
valley corridor or whether it flows through landscapes that are relatively flat, and is not confined
or bounded by valley walls.
Floodway
Floodway is defined as the channel of a watercourse and that inner portion of the floodplain
where flood depths and velocities are generally higher than those experienced in the flood
fringe. The floodway represents that area required for the safe passage of flood flows and that
area where flood depths and/or velocities are considered to be such that they pose a potential
threat to life and/or property damage.
High Water Mark
Defined as the mark made by the action of water under natural conditions on the shore or bank
of a body of water, which action has been so common and usual and so long continued that it
has created a difference between the character of the vegetation or soil on one side of the mark
and the character of the vegetation or soil on the other side of the mark.
Negative Impact (natural heritage features)
Negative Impact is defined as the loss of a natural heritage feature, its ecological function.
Negative Impact (flood prone area)
Negative Impact is defined as an unacceptable effect on the hydraulics of the flood plain and on
the function of the flood plain.
Negative Impact (fluvial geomorphology)
Negative Impact is defined as an unacceptable effect on the fluvial geomorphology of a
watercourse
Negative Impact (surface water and ground water)
Negative Impact is defined as an unacceptable effect on the quality and quantity of surface and
ground water, as determined by parameters and standards established by the NVCA and/or the
Ministry of Environment.
Other Municipal, Provincial, Federal Interests
These interests, among other matters, may refer to municipal Official Plans and Zoning ByLaws, under the Planning Act, provincial legislation such as the Lakes and Rivers Improvement
Act, and the federal Fisheries Act.
142
Pond, By-Pass
Bypass ponds are located outside the channel of a watercourse and are created by diverting
some of the flow of water from a watercourse into an adjacent pond. The outlet from these
ponds usually returns water from the pond to the watercourse.
Pond, Off-Line or Isolated Pond
An off-line is located outside, or beyond, the channel of a watercourse, where the boundary of
the watercourse is defined as the high water mark, as defined by the NVCA.
Pond, On-Line
An on-line pond is created within the defined channel of a watercourse by way of a dam or other
man-made means.
Subsequent Legislation:
Where an Act, its regulations, policies, or Plans have been referred to in this Policy, such
references shall be interpreted to include any subsequent changes that may replace or revise
the applicable legislation, regulation, policy, or Plan.
Significant Natural Heritage Features
“Significant” natural heritage features, such as wetlands and woodlands, may be defined by the
Ministry of Natural Resources, the Counties of Dufferin, Grey, Simcoe, any local municipality,
and the NVCA.
Significant Riparian Areas
These areas are generally defined as the lands (wet or dry) within 30 metres of the high water
mark of perennial watercourses. Significant riparian areas include intermittent streams, such as
those originating on the Niagara Escarpment or those which are associated with wetlands.
Watercourse
A watercourse is flowing water, though not necessarily continuous, within a defined channel and
with a bed or banks and usually discharges itself into some other watercourse or body of water.
Wetland
Means land that,
(a)
is seasonally or permanently covered by shallow water or has a water table close to
or at its surface,
(b)
directly contributes to the hydrological function of a watershed through connection
with a surface watercourse,
(c)
has hydric soils, the formation of which has been caused by the presence of
abundant water, and
(d)
has vegetation dominated by hydrophytic plants or water tolerant plants, the
dominance of which has been favored by the presence of abundant water,
but does not include periodically soaked or wet land that is used for agricultural purposes and
no longer exhibits a wetland characteristic referred to in clause (c) and (d).
143
8.0
MONITORING
8.1
Policy
The Ponds Policy will be reviewed on an on-going basis to evaluate its effectiveness. This
Policy may be amended from time to time in order to reflect changing legislation, regulations,
and policies at the federal, provincial, and municipal level. Amendments to this Policy may also
occur as a result of changing programs and procedures at the Nottawasaga Valley
Conservation Authority. Significant changes to this Policy will only occur through the normal
policy formulation process, which includes ultimate approval from the Planning Advisory
Committee, the Executive Committee and the Full NVCA Membership. Minor technical
amendments (e.g. correcting ambiguous language) may be permitted at the NVCA staff level
without the approval of the Committees and the Full NVCA Membership.
Significant amendments to this policy will provide for an opportunity for comments from the
NVCA’s member municipalities and the public.
8.2
Cumulative Impact Assessment of Pond Development
The impacts of pond development will be managed and monitored on a cumulative basis over
time, on a watershed basis. The generation of baseline data over time may result in subsequent
changes to this Policy.
9.0
DISCLAIMER
•
Ponds represent water hazards, which require ongoing inspection and maintenance.
Property owners are liable for the proper operation, maintenance, repair and
rehabilitation of ponds/dams.
• The Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority, its officers and employees disclaim
any liability, which may result from structural failure, accidental drowning, and property
damage or otherwise associated with the development of a pond within the NVCA
watershed.
10.0
APPROVAL
This Policy came into effect by resolution on March 8, 2002.
This Policy was amended by resolution on May 13, 2005.
Chief Administrative Officer/Secretary-Treasurer
Wayne R. Wilson
Planning Advisory Committee
Lynn Dollin, Chair
Full Authority
Chris Carrier, Chair
144
Appendix 6
145
146
Appendix 7
Two-Zone and Special Policy Areas
Floodplain Management Approaches
147
148
149
150
151
Appendix 8
Interpretation of Clause 2(1)(d) and Clause 2(1)(e) (Great
Lakes Shoreline) in Conservation Authorities Regulations
152
153
154

Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority

Transcription

Similar documents

Glen Haffy Conservation Area Trail Map

New Study Shows ʺCollapseʺ of Worldʹs Largest

Kids Committed to Conservation

COMMUNITY - Ol Pejeta Conservancy

Fire-bellied Toads

AN EXPERIENCE OF Tarun Bharat Sangh (TBS)

AN EXPERIENCE OF TARUN BHARAT SANGH

with Andrew Knight, Angelika Wilhelm

Palmate Newt

From the Geosciences to the Material Culture in